This largely admiring biographical article in the Telegraph makes for an interesting contrast with this one in the Guardian, from 2004. Both have the now-infamous "extravagance" quote, and both mention that Mrs. Black started off with the disclosure that she used to be made fun of for her "scruffy" clothes when a teenager, a little before telling the world about her unbounded extravagance. The writer of the Guardian article treats that self-disclosure skeptically, but the Telegraph writer takes it at face value. Both contain details of Mrs. Black's troubled past, and both call attention to her - well, attractiveness. The Guardian bio juxtaposes Mrs. Black with the 2003 report by the Special Committee headed up by Gordon Paris. It's a fitting one in retrospect, seeing as how both permeate the trial while, in explicit terms, both are part of it only peripherally.
The Globe and Mail columnist quoted in both articles, Margaret Wente, hasn't commented much recently about either of the Blacks. Her latest column devoted to the subject is dated Feb. 24 of this year.
Another, much shorter, piece in the Telegraph relates, to use the author's own words, "a chorus of mockery of the former press baron" in the press itself, "as well as a bout of media navel-gazing."
----------
Mrs. Black has included an apology for the "vermin" remarks in her latest Maclean's column, as pointed out by Douglas Bell of Toronto Life's Conrad Black Trial blog. [This column of hers has not been webbed yet.]
Also, the Australian has a fashion review that pans her taste in clothes during the trial, although her Thursday outfit was treated somewhat approvingly.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Media Roundup: The Week That Was; Opinions Mounting
The number of webbed stories on the Conrad Black trial is beginning to slow down. With the background largely explained, and no expected news until Monday, the weekend slowdown could almost be expected.
1. The trial got a brief mention, as number 3 of four items listed in "Five Days: Corporate Dramas Steal The Show From The Fed," in the New York Times. It didn't make the top five list of business articles on nytimes.com, though. Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall, wrote the note for the Times.
2. From the Guardian's business section, Andrew Clark fills in more detail on how Conrad Black's "bad attitude" was put into perspective by Edward Genson. It contains the name of the witness that was the corporate finance manager of Hollinger International, now Sun-Times Media Group, at the time of "the American Trucker transaction," Craig Holick, and the name of the company who bought American Trucker, et al.: Primedia. (Intertec Publishing, the company name mentioned in the indictment, was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Primedia; it's now named "Primedia Business Magazines & Media," perhaps from being folded into the latter.)
3. A write-up from the Irish Independent, with the headline "Black seeks to shield jury from eyes of press." Registration required to see it.
4. The National Post has a recap summary of observations on the trial. Notes that Mark Steyn coined the moniker "Chicago Legal" to describe the prosecution team.
5. Romina Maurino has an re-cap in the Toronto Sun.
6. The Globe and Mail's Paul Waldie has an item on Conrad Black's "hosing down" E-mail. It includes a mention of the now-well-known difficulty Eric Sussman had in pronouncing "calumnies" while reading that E-mail to the court. (The singular is "calumny," but its associated verb form is "calumniate.")
7. Slate has another write-up, from Scott Jacobs. It begins by noting that the beginning excitement is being replaced by the "long, hard slog" through the voluminous evidence.
8. A more in-depth report is at the Times Online. It's written by Tom Bower, author of Conrad & Lady Black, who is covering the trial in Chicago. Mr. Bower notes that Mr. Black and David Radler were actually old friends, as well as partners, who have turned on each other. He also presents Gordon Paris as a man of as-yet-unbesmirched probity.
Also, three opinion pieces relating to the Conrad Black trial:
1. The blog "Power Line" recommends Mark Steyn's coverage of the trial, and has an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal Online article that relates, to use the capsule description in the blog, the "ambivalent Canadian perspective" on the trial. Clarice Feldman, from another blog ("American Thinker") similarly praises Mr. Steyn, and recommends his coverage of the trial. [The Steyn post to which the AT entry links is here.] Support for Mr. Steyn's coverage is also on Hugh Hewitt's blog at Townhall.com. An early mention of Mr. Steyn's blogging is over at "Relapsed Catholic."
2. This one is available only to registered users of the Winnipeg Free Press: "Jury should cut Black some slack."
3. Sid Ryan, with his somewhat cynical take on the trial, includes a recounting of the Dominion Stores pension-fund lawsuit. Mr. Ryan is quite glad that his fellow workers are sitting in judgment over Conrad Black.
There's an interesting background to the Dominion controversy. Until Dominion Stores lost the lawsuit, Conrad Black administered its pension fund as a "pay-as-you-go" system: the company was responsible for underfunding, and could claim the proceeds of overfunding. The pay-as-you-go aspect, provided that prior approval was secured for surplus withdrawal from the Ontario Pensions Commission, was part of normal business practice in Canada. The union lawsuit induced a change in the relevant laws. That lawsuit put an end to transfers of surpluses into the corporate till for corporate use, as of 1987, when the change was enacted and implemented. Dominion at the time of the suit was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hollinger Inc, of which Conrad Black was the chairman. The amount that was sued for by the Dominion unions was actually $38 million; they won the giveback in the Ontario Supreme Court in August 1986, athough payment was not issued until 1987. In the Supreme Court decision, the Commission was singled out as the institution at fault. Conrad Black or anyone else in Hollinger or "Domgroup," Dominion Stores' corporate name at the time, wasn't blamed in that decision. (Distilled from Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall, pp. 102-5.
(Another Siklos-derived factiod: Mr. Black was a young Liberal, as of the mid-1960s, and his friendship with Peter G. White, a known Progressive Conservative, may very well have gotten Mr. White a job with Maurice Sauvé, a Liberal forestry minister under Liberal Prime Minister Lester Pearson. See Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall, p. 22.)
Finally: one of those "hard-core" journalists mentioned by Mr. Jacobs, Kevin Baker of the National Post, describes how his interest in the trial turned him on to day-time TV.
1. The trial got a brief mention, as number 3 of four items listed in "Five Days: Corporate Dramas Steal The Show From The Fed," in the New York Times. It didn't make the top five list of business articles on nytimes.com, though. Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall, wrote the note for the Times.
2. From the Guardian's business section, Andrew Clark fills in more detail on how Conrad Black's "bad attitude" was put into perspective by Edward Genson. It contains the name of the witness that was the corporate finance manager of Hollinger International, now Sun-Times Media Group, at the time of "the American Trucker transaction," Craig Holick, and the name of the company who bought American Trucker, et al.: Primedia. (Intertec Publishing, the company name mentioned in the indictment, was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Primedia; it's now named "Primedia Business Magazines & Media," perhaps from being folded into the latter.)
3. A write-up from the Irish Independent, with the headline "Black seeks to shield jury from eyes of press." Registration required to see it.
4. The National Post has a recap summary of observations on the trial. Notes that Mark Steyn coined the moniker "Chicago Legal" to describe the prosecution team.
5. Romina Maurino has an re-cap in the Toronto Sun.
6. The Globe and Mail's Paul Waldie has an item on Conrad Black's "hosing down" E-mail. It includes a mention of the now-well-known difficulty Eric Sussman had in pronouncing "calumnies" while reading that E-mail to the court. (The singular is "calumny," but its associated verb form is "calumniate.")
7. Slate has another write-up, from Scott Jacobs. It begins by noting that the beginning excitement is being replaced by the "long, hard slog" through the voluminous evidence.
8. A more in-depth report is at the Times Online. It's written by Tom Bower, author of Conrad & Lady Black, who is covering the trial in Chicago. Mr. Bower notes that Mr. Black and David Radler were actually old friends, as well as partners, who have turned on each other. He also presents Gordon Paris as a man of as-yet-unbesmirched probity.
Also, three opinion pieces relating to the Conrad Black trial:
1. The blog "Power Line" recommends Mark Steyn's coverage of the trial, and has an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal Online article that relates, to use the capsule description in the blog, the "ambivalent Canadian perspective" on the trial. Clarice Feldman, from another blog ("American Thinker") similarly praises Mr. Steyn, and recommends his coverage of the trial. [The Steyn post to which the AT entry links is here.] Support for Mr. Steyn's coverage is also on Hugh Hewitt's blog at Townhall.com. An early mention of Mr. Steyn's blogging is over at "Relapsed Catholic."
2. This one is available only to registered users of the Winnipeg Free Press: "Jury should cut Black some slack."
3. Sid Ryan, with his somewhat cynical take on the trial, includes a recounting of the Dominion Stores pension-fund lawsuit. Mr. Ryan is quite glad that his fellow workers are sitting in judgment over Conrad Black.
There's an interesting background to the Dominion controversy. Until Dominion Stores lost the lawsuit, Conrad Black administered its pension fund as a "pay-as-you-go" system: the company was responsible for underfunding, and could claim the proceeds of overfunding. The pay-as-you-go aspect, provided that prior approval was secured for surplus withdrawal from the Ontario Pensions Commission, was part of normal business practice in Canada. The union lawsuit induced a change in the relevant laws. That lawsuit put an end to transfers of surpluses into the corporate till for corporate use, as of 1987, when the change was enacted and implemented. Dominion at the time of the suit was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hollinger Inc, of which Conrad Black was the chairman. The amount that was sued for by the Dominion unions was actually $38 million; they won the giveback in the Ontario Supreme Court in August 1986, athough payment was not issued until 1987. In the Supreme Court decision, the Commission was singled out as the institution at fault. Conrad Black or anyone else in Hollinger or "Domgroup," Dominion Stores' corporate name at the time, wasn't blamed in that decision. (Distilled from Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall, pp. 102-5.
(Another Siklos-derived factiod: Mr. Black was a young Liberal, as of the mid-1960s, and his friendship with Peter G. White, a known Progressive Conservative, may very well have gotten Mr. White a job with Maurice Sauvé, a Liberal forestry minister under Liberal Prime Minister Lester Pearson. See Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall, p. 22.)
Finally: one of those "hard-core" journalists mentioned by Mr. Jacobs, Kevin Baker of the National Post, describes how his interest in the trial turned him on to day-time TV.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Discussion Of Conrad Black Trial on Conservative Forums
There's a recent thread, devoted to how important the trial really is, over at the Free Dominion. (The attached poll, as of March 27th, 5:50 PM EDT, has 11 votes out of 18 for "I could not care less.") The threads devoted to Conrad Black, identified by the keyword "conradblack," over at the Free Republic are almost all old. Evidently, the trial is not that much of a political football as yet.
[UPDATE: The trial is making its way into Free Republic. This posting, of a George Jonas opinion piece, was put there on March 31. There were few comments on it, though.]
----------
Hollinger Inc. stock has had a manager-and-insider cease-trading order put on it for approximately three years as of now, but that ban may end. According to this report from Editor & Publisher, there will be an Ontario Securities Commission hearing on whether or not to rescind it.
[The OSC has webbed copies of both the original order here, another management-and-insider cease trade order for Hollinger International stock here, and one for Hollinger Canadian Newspapers, LP here. Believe it or not, Gordon Paris is named in all of them; see the bottom of each. The OSC is nothing if not thorough.]
Canadian Business Online has a webbed discussion, by Romina Maurino, of the differences between Canadian and U.S. securities-regulatory systems, including the criminalizing of associated white-collar crime. She concludes that the U.S. regulatory environment is "much harsher" than that of Canada.
[UPDATE: The trial is making its way into Free Republic. This posting, of a George Jonas opinion piece, was put there on March 31. There were few comments on it, though.]
----------
Hollinger Inc. stock has had a manager-and-insider cease-trading order put on it for approximately three years as of now, but that ban may end. According to this report from Editor & Publisher, there will be an Ontario Securities Commission hearing on whether or not to rescind it.
[The OSC has webbed copies of both the original order here, another management-and-insider cease trade order for Hollinger International stock here, and one for Hollinger Canadian Newspapers, LP here. Believe it or not, Gordon Paris is named in all of them; see the bottom of each. The OSC is nothing if not thorough.]
Canadian Business Online has a webbed discussion, by Romina Maurino, of the differences between Canadian and U.S. securities-regulatory systems, including the criminalizing of associated white-collar crime. She concludes that the U.S. regulatory environment is "much harsher" than that of Canada.
Analysis and Opinions
Two opinion pieces discussing the Conrad Black trial are from women. First of all, the CBC's Georgie Binks puckishly opines that none of the men participating in the trial have been called "hotties" because none of them are. Secondly, Bloomberg's Ann Wollner, a pro-comeuppance observer, focuses on Conrad Black's arrogance and notes that this attitude and corporate crime often go together.
Here are four analysis pieces:
1. Andrew Harris of Bloomberg focuses in on the age gap between the prosecution team (average age close to mine) and Conrad Black's defense team (average age close to that of my father, if you care.) Mr. Harris notes that Patrick Fitzgerald is planning to sit the trial out, and act as a kind of executive consultant.
2. The Guardian has one that allows comments; it's in the "Comment Is Free" subdomain. The author of it, George Tombs, focuses on the prevalence of television in America, and wonders how long it will be before the made-for-TV specials on the Conrad Black trial will be put together. He holds up the opening statement of assistant prosecutor Jeffery Cramer as eminently filmable.
As of March 24th, 10 AM EDT, there are 25 comments, many of which are from Americans either complaining about Mr. Tombs' snobbishness or stating that they don't care all that much about the trial. As of Mar. 25th, 11:05 PM, there's 33. The 26th and 29th in the thread are responses to previous comments from Mr. Tombs himself; in the latter one, he discloses that he's a teacher.
[NOTE: The "Chicago Law" observation originally came from Mark Steyn. Mr. Steyn himself used "Chicago Legal."]
3. The Financial Times has an assessment of Mr. Black's defense so far, as somewhat less than stellar. Mr. Black himself is part of this anticlimax; he's quoted in the piece as saying, “It went well, I think.”
4 "OhMyNews" International of South Korea has a piece that interprets Conrad Black's legal and financial woes as a case study in hubris and nemesis. It seems to have been written before the trial started, but it does have a lot of background information.
5. Posted by 940 News of Montreal, an analysis and wrap-up in one, from the Canadian Press. It includes Mr. Black's latest: "Rarely at a loss for a pithy comment, the 62-year-old Montreal-born Black's final words after the week's circus: 'What nostalgia.'" It explains why both Conrad and Barbara Black are such media magnets in Canada, and why the trial is too. This analysis is written by Romina Maurino, who is credited for it in the Toronto Star's post of it.
Also: A write-up on the "elephant in the courtroom," an internal report whose "architect" was Gordon Paris that has been ruled inadmissible because it contains language that might prejudice the jury. The write-up, written by David Bailey of Reuters UK, notes that the report, though not allowed to be referred to explicitly, nevertheless has an influence. (My guess as to why: the prosecution relied upon it when preparing the indictment.)
Here are four analysis pieces:
1. Andrew Harris of Bloomberg focuses in on the age gap between the prosecution team (average age close to mine) and Conrad Black's defense team (average age close to that of my father, if you care.) Mr. Harris notes that Patrick Fitzgerald is planning to sit the trial out, and act as a kind of executive consultant.
2. The Guardian has one that allows comments; it's in the "Comment Is Free" subdomain. The author of it, George Tombs, focuses on the prevalence of television in America, and wonders how long it will be before the made-for-TV specials on the Conrad Black trial will be put together. He holds up the opening statement of assistant prosecutor Jeffery Cramer as eminently filmable.
As of March 24th, 10 AM EDT, there are 25 comments, many of which are from Americans either complaining about Mr. Tombs' snobbishness or stating that they don't care all that much about the trial. As of Mar. 25th, 11:05 PM, there's 33. The 26th and 29th in the thread are responses to previous comments from Mr. Tombs himself; in the latter one, he discloses that he's a teacher.
[NOTE: The "Chicago Law" observation originally came from Mark Steyn. Mr. Steyn himself used "Chicago Legal."]
3. The Financial Times has an assessment of Mr. Black's defense so far, as somewhat less than stellar. Mr. Black himself is part of this anticlimax; he's quoted in the piece as saying, “It went well, I think.”
4 "OhMyNews" International of South Korea has a piece that interprets Conrad Black's legal and financial woes as a case study in hubris and nemesis. It seems to have been written before the trial started, but it does have a lot of background information.
5. Posted by 940 News of Montreal, an analysis and wrap-up in one, from the Canadian Press. It includes Mr. Black's latest: "Rarely at a loss for a pithy comment, the 62-year-old Montreal-born Black's final words after the week's circus: 'What nostalgia.'" It explains why both Conrad and Barbara Black are such media magnets in Canada, and why the trial is too. This analysis is written by Romina Maurino, who is credited for it in the Toronto Star's post of it.
Also: A write-up on the "elephant in the courtroom," an internal report whose "architect" was Gordon Paris that has been ruled inadmissible because it contains language that might prejudice the jury. The write-up, written by David Bailey of Reuters UK, notes that the report, though not allowed to be referred to explicitly, nevertheless has an influence. (My guess as to why: the prosecution relied upon it when preparing the indictment.)
Amy St. Eve To Question A Torontonian?
According to an item at the National Post Website, Judge St. Eve may be making a working trip to my home town of Toronto. The prosecution plans to go, and suggested to Judge St. Eve that she go too.
This report from the Ottawa Citizen, by Barbara Shecter and Theresa Tedesco, has more detail, and discloses that the reason why Judge St. Eve "would consider" taking the trip with the prosecution is "the hope that the U.S. prosecutors and the defense lawyers 'might behave better.'"
[UPDATE: Thanks to Ms. Tedesco, I have found out that Judge St. Eve has stayed in Chicago.]
This report from the Ottawa Citizen, by Barbara Shecter and Theresa Tedesco, has more detail, and discloses that the reason why Judge St. Eve "would consider" taking the trip with the prosecution is "the hope that the U.S. prosecutors and the defense lawyers 'might behave better.'"
[UPDATE: Thanks to Ms. Tedesco, I have found out that Judge St. Eve has stayed in Chicago.]
Media Roundup: Documentation and E-Mails
A selection of articles covering yesterday's action at the Conrad Black trial:
1. A report from the Chicago Tribune's Rudolph Bush, which opens up with this contrast: "Investment banker Gordon Paris was paid thousands of dollars a day to take control of Hollinger International Inc. after Conrad Black was ousted from the company on suspicion of bilking it of millions. But, despite his handsome salary, bonus package and stock benefits, Paris didn't have access to a corporate jet, throw himself a birthday party, hire an opera singer, or purchase clothes on the company dime, according to his testimony Thursday in Black's corruption trial."
2. This report is from news.com.au.
3. A brief AP Wire note from the Belleville News-Democrat, with two witnesses scheduled to testify Monday, and a longer item that includes this quote from Conrad Black, "I will take on the task of hosing down shareholders who need it as a matter of some priority," from an E-mail to Richard Burt and Marie-Josée Kravis.
4. A wrapup of the first week's events by Romina Maurino. Contains a previous snippet from that same E-mail quoted from just above: "this practice of certain of the institutions holding hands with elements of the competing press and representing us as nest featherers suffering from financial strain should be rebutted." Posted by 680 News, which also has a briefer report here.
5. A report on the Canadian view of the trial, from the Wall Street Journal Online. Includes a brief bio of Mr. Black, laced in with an explanation of why he's a continual object of attention amongst us Canadians. There's a quote from a George Ryan about Conrad Black - "he's a megalomaniac" - which serves as an opening bookend; the typical Canadian attitude towards elites is the ending one.
6. A one-paragraph note from the Lexington, Kentucky Herald-Leader.
7. Peter Worthington's latest report, which notes that the number of British reporters is dwindling. He paints Eddie Greenspan in a favourable light.
8. Csr. Greenspan gets less favourable press from the Toronto Star, which contains a specific flub of the kind that Steve Skurka mentioned on the latest episode of The Verdict: ""This was Conrad Black's board," said Greenspan.... "This was not Conrad Black's board," said a firm Paris in quick rejoinder. 'This was Hollinger International's board.'" The Star also has a wrapup of yesterday's trial events, as well as a round-up of pro-vindication Canadian journalists (Peter Worthington, Mark Steyn and Christie Blatchford.) The author, Antonia Zerbesias, also has a couple of unkind things to say about The Verdict, as well as more unkind words for those three.
9. From the Montreal Gazette, a report that contains more text from that E-mail to Mrs. Kravis and Mr. Burt.
10. The Chicago Sun-Times has both a report and a column, from Michael Sneed, which contains a compliment for Mr. Black on his writing skills! (Old news in Canada.)
11. An item from the Morning Herald, in Sydney, Australia, centres on the E-mails from Conrad Black that were introduced as evidence yesterday; it has copious quotes from them.
12. The write-up from the Globe and Mail contains a new picture of a smiling Alana Black.
13. Re-cap of the first week of the trial from The First Post. Notes that Edward Genson referred to Mr. Black as "Conrad."
14. The National Post's write-up not only identifies the recipients of the E-mail it quotes from, but also explains the reduction of the dollar amount allegedly stolen from Hollinger Int'l to $60 million by "[t]he U.S. Attorney," who took out $23.8 million attributed to David Radler. As a result of Mr. Radler's plea bargain with the SEC, that attributed amount is no longer relevant to the trial.
15. An Associated Press write-up, which begins with a re-cap of the Barbara Black outburst.
And finally, a brief mention of the trial from none other than...Al-Jazeera.
1. A report from the Chicago Tribune's Rudolph Bush, which opens up with this contrast: "Investment banker Gordon Paris was paid thousands of dollars a day to take control of Hollinger International Inc. after Conrad Black was ousted from the company on suspicion of bilking it of millions. But, despite his handsome salary, bonus package and stock benefits, Paris didn't have access to a corporate jet, throw himself a birthday party, hire an opera singer, or purchase clothes on the company dime, according to his testimony Thursday in Black's corruption trial."
2. This report is from news.com.au.
3. A brief AP Wire note from the Belleville News-Democrat, with two witnesses scheduled to testify Monday, and a longer item that includes this quote from Conrad Black, "I will take on the task of hosing down shareholders who need it as a matter of some priority," from an E-mail to Richard Burt and Marie-Josée Kravis.
4. A wrapup of the first week's events by Romina Maurino. Contains a previous snippet from that same E-mail quoted from just above: "this practice of certain of the institutions holding hands with elements of the competing press and representing us as nest featherers suffering from financial strain should be rebutted." Posted by 680 News, which also has a briefer report here.
5. A report on the Canadian view of the trial, from the Wall Street Journal Online. Includes a brief bio of Mr. Black, laced in with an explanation of why he's a continual object of attention amongst us Canadians. There's a quote from a George Ryan about Conrad Black - "he's a megalomaniac" - which serves as an opening bookend; the typical Canadian attitude towards elites is the ending one.
6. A one-paragraph note from the Lexington, Kentucky Herald-Leader.
7. Peter Worthington's latest report, which notes that the number of British reporters is dwindling. He paints Eddie Greenspan in a favourable light.
8. Csr. Greenspan gets less favourable press from the Toronto Star, which contains a specific flub of the kind that Steve Skurka mentioned on the latest episode of The Verdict: ""This was Conrad Black's board," said Greenspan.... "This was not Conrad Black's board," said a firm Paris in quick rejoinder. 'This was Hollinger International's board.'" The Star also has a wrapup of yesterday's trial events, as well as a round-up of pro-vindication Canadian journalists (Peter Worthington, Mark Steyn and Christie Blatchford.) The author, Antonia Zerbesias, also has a couple of unkind things to say about The Verdict, as well as more unkind words for those three.
9. From the Montreal Gazette, a report that contains more text from that E-mail to Mrs. Kravis and Mr. Burt.
10. The Chicago Sun-Times has both a report and a column, from Michael Sneed, which contains a compliment for Mr. Black on his writing skills! (Old news in Canada.)
11. An item from the Morning Herald, in Sydney, Australia, centres on the E-mails from Conrad Black that were introduced as evidence yesterday; it has copious quotes from them.
12. The write-up from the Globe and Mail contains a new picture of a smiling Alana Black.
13. Re-cap of the first week of the trial from The First Post. Notes that Edward Genson referred to Mr. Black as "Conrad."
14. The National Post's write-up not only identifies the recipients of the E-mail it quotes from, but also explains the reduction of the dollar amount allegedly stolen from Hollinger Int'l to $60 million by "[t]he U.S. Attorney," who took out $23.8 million attributed to David Radler. As a result of Mr. Radler's plea bargain with the SEC, that attributed amount is no longer relevant to the trial.
15. An Associated Press write-up, which begins with a re-cap of the Barbara Black outburst.
And finally, a brief mention of the trial from none other than...Al-Jazeera.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
The Verdict: Cracked Consensus
This episode of The Verdict, like the previous one, had its look at the Conrad Black trial serving as a pair of bookends for two other cases of note.
The resident legal expert on the trial, Steve Skurka, diverged from the consensus opinion regarding Edward Greenspan's cross-examination of Gordon Paris. He assessed Csr. Greenspan's performance as hurtful to the defense because he had tried too hard, and thus had allowed Mr. Paris to pontificate somewhat. He said, though, that the cross-examination went better for the defense with the two following witnesses, one of which was the corporate finance manager of Hollinger Int'l.
[The other witness was Peter Laino, "who worked at a company that bought two publications from Hollinger in 1998..." The name and the quote came from the latest write-up from the Globe and Mail's Paul Waldie. That company was Intertec Publishing; the transaction in question is called "the American Trucker transaction" in the indictment, starting on p. 7 of it.]
Csr. Skurka ended with the observation that the plan to finger David Radler for all the noncompete deals in the indictment, except for the CanWest one, took shape without any glitches emerging.
A consensus in miniature did emerge from all of the guests invited on to discuss the trial itself, which Ms. Todd herself agreed with: the jury was unusually attentive. The consensus expectation didn't fare very well regarding the jury's interest level, either.
Two guests were there to discuss Conrad Black, but not his trial. Mark Steyn and Professor Ruth Prigozy, an F. Scott Fitzgerald expert, spent one segment debating whether or not Conrad Black was a real life Jay Gatsby, Fitzgerald's eponymous self-made man. This discussion was prompted by a public statement made by a friend of Mr. Black, one in a high place, and Mr. Black's printed reaction to the proffered help.
The next-to-last segment featured another lawyer, Hugh Totten, as a guest, but his counter-point was a journalist from Chicago Public Radio, Diantha Parker. She spent most of her time debunking the consensus myths about the jury's limitations.
Csr. Totten also broke from the consensus view by describing Jeffrey Cramer's opening address as "underwhelming." The prosecution team is going out of their way to underpromise, he added. Csr. Cramer's address was also described as "low-key" by Csr. Totten.
At the end of this episode, Ms. Todd noted that a lot of the courtroom scenery-chewing was in fact calculated to impress the jury, and it seemed to be having that effect. A good first week, it was.
The resident legal expert on the trial, Steve Skurka, diverged from the consensus opinion regarding Edward Greenspan's cross-examination of Gordon Paris. He assessed Csr. Greenspan's performance as hurtful to the defense because he had tried too hard, and thus had allowed Mr. Paris to pontificate somewhat. He said, though, that the cross-examination went better for the defense with the two following witnesses, one of which was the corporate finance manager of Hollinger Int'l.
[The other witness was Peter Laino, "who worked at a company that bought two publications from Hollinger in 1998..." The name and the quote came from the latest write-up from the Globe and Mail's Paul Waldie. That company was Intertec Publishing; the transaction in question is called "the American Trucker transaction" in the indictment, starting on p. 7 of it.]
Csr. Skurka ended with the observation that the plan to finger David Radler for all the noncompete deals in the indictment, except for the CanWest one, took shape without any glitches emerging.
A consensus in miniature did emerge from all of the guests invited on to discuss the trial itself, which Ms. Todd herself agreed with: the jury was unusually attentive. The consensus expectation didn't fare very well regarding the jury's interest level, either.
Two guests were there to discuss Conrad Black, but not his trial. Mark Steyn and Professor Ruth Prigozy, an F. Scott Fitzgerald expert, spent one segment debating whether or not Conrad Black was a real life Jay Gatsby, Fitzgerald's eponymous self-made man. This discussion was prompted by a public statement made by a friend of Mr. Black, one in a high place, and Mr. Black's printed reaction to the proffered help.
The next-to-last segment featured another lawyer, Hugh Totten, as a guest, but his counter-point was a journalist from Chicago Public Radio, Diantha Parker. She spent most of her time debunking the consensus myths about the jury's limitations.
Csr. Totten also broke from the consensus view by describing Jeffrey Cramer's opening address as "underwhelming." The prosecution team is going out of their way to underpromise, he added. Csr. Cramer's address was also described as "low-key" by Csr. Totten.
At the end of this episode, Ms. Todd noted that a lot of the courtroom scenery-chewing was in fact calculated to impress the jury, and it seemed to be having that effect. A good first week, it was.
Latest on the Gordon Paris testimony
According to this report from Reuters, Gordon Paris has testified about Tweedy, Browne demanding action over the fees collected by Conrad Black and the other defendants, as well as the perks they got. These fees not only included the non-compete fees but also management fees, which Tweedy, Browne thought were too high. Mr. Paris also disclosed that it was he who brought in Richard Breeden. Edward Greenspan's attempt to get Mr. Paris to admit on the stand that "he was tardy notifying the government of a stock grant he received" was denied by Judge St. Eve with the jury absent.
Csr. Greenspan was successful, though, in getting Mr. Paris to admit that he didn't know much about the newspaper business: "You became the managing person, the guy who had the chief managing role in this company where you never had any experience before." [Thanks to Maclean's "Daily Digest" for this quote.]
Another detailed report is here. It specifies what Csr. Greenspan did jump on: the fact that Mr. Paris was on the perks-and-fees investigative committee at the same time he was on both the audit committee and the board itself, which "would have made it difficult for him to be impartial..." Mr. Paris dealt with the implication that he wanted Conrad Black's job: "Paris said he didn't want the CEO's job, but had to take it as so many other senior executives had left the company by that time."
He did, though, raise his voice when denying that these roles compromised his objectivity, according to this report. Also from it: "Mr. Greenspan said it appeared that Mr. Paris had been paid US$511,375, or more than US$17,000 a day, for just six weeks of work as president and CEO in 2003."
Bloomberg's report is here. It notes that Csr. Greenspan asked, in cross-examination, if directors James Thompson and Henry Kissinger were "pushovers." Mr. Paris replied, with respect to the influence Conrad Black had over them, that he didn't know and couldn't comment.
Associated Press also has a report out. This webbing of it is courtesy of Forbes. Includes the note that Mr. Paris was notified that he got the CEO's job by James Thompson: "'Thompson said, congratulations, that they expected me to assume the role under the circumstances and given the loss of a substantial number of executives' from the company,' said Paris..."
MSNBC.com has one too, a repost from FT.com. It points to Eddie Greenspan's ignorance of American trial procedure: "On several occasions, Mr Greenspan's questions were objected to by prosecutors on technical grounds, leaving Mr Greenspan speechless in some cases and looking to his American co-counsel for guidance."
Mark Steyn also notes on his blog that Csr. Greenspan wasn't used to American procedure, although Mr. Steyn softened Csr. Grenspan's procedural flubs by writing that he "came away with some hits but one big miss." Mr. Steyn also admitted that he had earlier underestimated the prosecutors.
Another news outlet, AllHeadlineNews.com, is now covering the trial; its brief report on Mr. Paris' testimony is here.
----------
The Nation is also weighing in, on the class war aspect. Its report is by Naomi Klein, and focuses on Conrad Black's role as proponent of the "Anglosphere." It includes the name of the accountant who was dismissed by Judge St. Eve for pro-prosecution bias: John Tien. Her report, which is not an explicit call for comeuppance, will appear in the magazine itself (Apr. 9 issue.)
Csr. Greenspan was successful, though, in getting Mr. Paris to admit that he didn't know much about the newspaper business: "You became the managing person, the guy who had the chief managing role in this company where you never had any experience before." [Thanks to Maclean's "Daily Digest" for this quote.]
Another detailed report is here. It specifies what Csr. Greenspan did jump on: the fact that Mr. Paris was on the perks-and-fees investigative committee at the same time he was on both the audit committee and the board itself, which "would have made it difficult for him to be impartial..." Mr. Paris dealt with the implication that he wanted Conrad Black's job: "Paris said he didn't want the CEO's job, but had to take it as so many other senior executives had left the company by that time."
He did, though, raise his voice when denying that these roles compromised his objectivity, according to this report. Also from it: "Mr. Greenspan said it appeared that Mr. Paris had been paid US$511,375, or more than US$17,000 a day, for just six weeks of work as president and CEO in 2003."
Bloomberg's report is here. It notes that Csr. Greenspan asked, in cross-examination, if directors James Thompson and Henry Kissinger were "pushovers." Mr. Paris replied, with respect to the influence Conrad Black had over them, that he didn't know and couldn't comment.
Associated Press also has a report out. This webbing of it is courtesy of Forbes. Includes the note that Mr. Paris was notified that he got the CEO's job by James Thompson: "'Thompson said, congratulations, that they expected me to assume the role under the circumstances and given the loss of a substantial number of executives' from the company,' said Paris..."
MSNBC.com has one too, a repost from FT.com. It points to Eddie Greenspan's ignorance of American trial procedure: "On several occasions, Mr Greenspan's questions were objected to by prosecutors on technical grounds, leaving Mr Greenspan speechless in some cases and looking to his American co-counsel for guidance."
Mark Steyn also notes on his blog that Csr. Greenspan wasn't used to American procedure, although Mr. Steyn softened Csr. Grenspan's procedural flubs by writing that he "came away with some hits but one big miss." Mr. Steyn also admitted that he had earlier underestimated the prosecutors.
Another news outlet, AllHeadlineNews.com, is now covering the trial; its brief report on Mr. Paris' testimony is here.
----------
The Nation is also weighing in, on the class war aspect. Its report is by Naomi Klein, and focuses on Conrad Black's role as proponent of the "Anglosphere." It includes the name of the accountant who was dismissed by Judge St. Eve for pro-prosecution bias: John Tien. Her report, which is not an explicit call for comeuppance, will appear in the magazine itself (Apr. 9 issue.)
BNN Is Back On The Beat
BNN just conducted an interview with Terry Sullivan, a Chicago lawyer, former prosecutor and watcher of the Conrad Black trial. When asked if Gordon Paris had been a good witness, Csr. Sullivan replied that Mr. Paris had been "good enough;" he’s there to “lay the groundwork” for the prosecution’s case.
The prosecution, according to Csr. Sullivan, seems to have it relatively easy. The jurors's life experiences don't encompass corporate jets, et. al., and few people have the stamina to get through the minutiae of the trial without getting bored. So, they're likely to remember a memorable factoid, just as the jury in the Gov. Ryan case remembered a Jamaica vacation.
It won't be a cake-walk for the prosecution, though. A witness after Mr. Paris said that non-compete payments are legitimate, so all the defense has to show is that the non-compete payments received by Hollinger Inc., Ravelston, Black himself, et. al., did remove a real competitive threat from all of the receivers. If successful, the defendants will be acquitted of all the charges that result from those payments. In addition, as brought up by one of the interviewers, the "fame factor" is a hurdle that the prosecutors have to get around: how could luminaries such as Henry Kissinger be snookered?
The prosecution, according to Csr. Sullivan, seems to have it relatively easy. The jurors's life experiences don't encompass corporate jets, et. al., and few people have the stamina to get through the minutiae of the trial without getting bored. So, they're likely to remember a memorable factoid, just as the jury in the Gov. Ryan case remembered a Jamaica vacation.
It won't be a cake-walk for the prosecution, though. A witness after Mr. Paris said that non-compete payments are legitimate, so all the defense has to show is that the non-compete payments received by Hollinger Inc., Ravelston, Black himself, et. al., did remove a real competitive threat from all of the receivers. If successful, the defendants will be acquitted of all the charges that result from those payments. In addition, as brought up by one of the interviewers, the "fame factor" is a hurdle that the prosecutors have to get around: how could luminaries such as Henry Kissinger be snookered?
Media Roundup: Not My Problem
More stories posted overnight on the Conrad Black trial:
1. A wrapup of Ron Safer's opening address from the Washington Times, which mentions Conrad Black being a British baron.
2. A knowlegeable account of the trial so far, from Law.Com. Contains the name of the lawyer for Peter Atkinson, whose opening address was delivered Tuesday afternoon: Benito Romano.
3. A brief note, recounting that Gordon Paris will continue testifying today. A more detailed report is here, with a quote from the end of Csr. Genson's questioning of Mr. Paris: "'So you're testifying to numbers that one of these young people told you,' Genson said, referring to the four prosecutors."
4. A rundown of yesterday that starts off with Mr. Black's rejection of the "well-meaning" analogy to Gatsby by Lord Rees-Mogg.
5. The Globe and Mail's detailed report on Mr. Paris' testimony, which describes both Paris' initial supply, including his testimony about Black's knowledgability of events at Hollinger Int'l, and his later loss of flow when challenged by Csr. Genson, at the end of which he admitted that he was using a fact sheet prepared by the prosecutors; the quote in #3 was Csr. Greenspan's reponse to that admission.
6. A triple, about aspects of the trial, from the Globe and Mail: a) Gordon Paris in his role as leader of the "kleptocracy" investigation at Hollinger Int'l; b) a light feature on the ignorance of the American lawyers in the trial about Canada; c) a report disclosing that the two lawyers with Torys LLP that were involved in the suspicious transactions, Beth DeMerchant and Darren Sukonick, won't testfy in the trial.
7. The latest from Peter Worthington, with the headline "Weak out of the gate" and the lead-in "Prosecution bumbles as horde of defence lawyers put Black and company's chances on the upturn." Opines that the prosecution made a mistake by lumping the four defendants together.
8. A write-up from the Toronto Star, which blames the youthful prosecutors for making a mess out of what would otherwise be credible testimony from Mr. Paris. The Star also solicited the opinion of P.J. O'Rourke during his book-tour visit to Toronto yesterday: Mr. O'Rourke believes that this case is more like Martha Stewart's than Enron's or WorldCom's.
9. Another piece by Romina Maurino, on Mr. Paris' "tough day," webbed by the Winnipeg Free Press.
10. A brief trial-related poll watch, of polled Canadians, from TheTyee.ca of British Columbia.
11. A more in-depth write-up from the National Post, which contains summaries of both of the closing arguments made yesterday, including Csr. Newman's impugnment of David Radler. The duo put on this story, Barbara Shecter and Theresa Tedesco, are the National Post's regulars, just as Romina Maurino is the Canadian Press'. When the quickie books on the Conrad Black trial hit the shelves, I predict, one of them will be authored by Ms. Maurino and the other will be written by the NP duo.
12. A brief account in The Age of Australia, with a picture of Conrad Black, his wife and his daughter, Alana, at the top of it. Reprinted from the Guardian.
13. A focus upon the foibles of Mr. Black that have been revealed in the trial is in the Australian.
14. An article at Time.com, which focuses on the reasonable-doubt standard. Opines that the defense team is using the Johnnie Cochran strategy.
Finally, this write-up about Dr. Margaret Somerville ends with an anecdote about Conrad Black, told to the author of the piece by his old (now-deceased) friend, Nick Auf de Maur, who ends with "He hates it when I tell that story."
1. A wrapup of Ron Safer's opening address from the Washington Times, which mentions Conrad Black being a British baron.
2. A knowlegeable account of the trial so far, from Law.Com. Contains the name of the lawyer for Peter Atkinson, whose opening address was delivered Tuesday afternoon: Benito Romano.
3. A brief note, recounting that Gordon Paris will continue testifying today. A more detailed report is here, with a quote from the end of Csr. Genson's questioning of Mr. Paris: "'So you're testifying to numbers that one of these young people told you,' Genson said, referring to the four prosecutors."
4. A rundown of yesterday that starts off with Mr. Black's rejection of the "well-meaning" analogy to Gatsby by Lord Rees-Mogg.
5. The Globe and Mail's detailed report on Mr. Paris' testimony, which describes both Paris' initial supply, including his testimony about Black's knowledgability of events at Hollinger Int'l, and his later loss of flow when challenged by Csr. Genson, at the end of which he admitted that he was using a fact sheet prepared by the prosecutors; the quote in #3 was Csr. Greenspan's reponse to that admission.
6. A triple, about aspects of the trial, from the Globe and Mail: a) Gordon Paris in his role as leader of the "kleptocracy" investigation at Hollinger Int'l; b) a light feature on the ignorance of the American lawyers in the trial about Canada; c) a report disclosing that the two lawyers with Torys LLP that were involved in the suspicious transactions, Beth DeMerchant and Darren Sukonick, won't testfy in the trial.
7. The latest from Peter Worthington, with the headline "Weak out of the gate" and the lead-in "Prosecution bumbles as horde of defence lawyers put Black and company's chances on the upturn." Opines that the prosecution made a mistake by lumping the four defendants together.
8. A write-up from the Toronto Star, which blames the youthful prosecutors for making a mess out of what would otherwise be credible testimony from Mr. Paris. The Star also solicited the opinion of P.J. O'Rourke during his book-tour visit to Toronto yesterday: Mr. O'Rourke believes that this case is more like Martha Stewart's than Enron's or WorldCom's.
9. Another piece by Romina Maurino, on Mr. Paris' "tough day," webbed by the Winnipeg Free Press.
10. A brief trial-related poll watch, of polled Canadians, from TheTyee.ca of British Columbia.
11. A more in-depth write-up from the National Post, which contains summaries of both of the closing arguments made yesterday, including Csr. Newman's impugnment of David Radler. The duo put on this story, Barbara Shecter and Theresa Tedesco, are the National Post's regulars, just as Romina Maurino is the Canadian Press'. When the quickie books on the Conrad Black trial hit the shelves, I predict, one of them will be authored by Ms. Maurino and the other will be written by the NP duo.
12. A brief account in The Age of Australia, with a picture of Conrad Black, his wife and his daughter, Alana, at the top of it. Reprinted from the Guardian.
13. A focus upon the foibles of Mr. Black that have been revealed in the trial is in the Australian.
14. An article at Time.com, which focuses on the reasonable-doubt standard. Opines that the defense team is using the Johnnie Cochran strategy.
Finally, this write-up about Dr. Margaret Somerville ends with an anecdote about Conrad Black, told to the author of the piece by his old (now-deceased) friend, Nick Auf de Maur, who ends with "He hates it when I tell that story."
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
The Verdict: The Shrinking Conrad Black Trial
The Verdict is now covering a few stories; it's no longer the "Conrad Black Show." Other trials were discussed, and only four guests were on to discuss the Conrad Black trial for this episode.
The first was regular Steve Skurka. In his opinion, the defense “won the day.” Ron Safer, the lawyer for Mark Kipnis, disclosed that the Hollinger International audit committee, Torys LLP and KPMG all knew of and approved the non-compete transactions for the CanWest deal. [MSNBC has a writeup on this part of Csr. Safer's opening address. The firm identified as "a top law firm in Canada" is Torys.] The CanWest transaction is only one part of the entire group of transactions flagged in the indictment, but it is the largest, Csr. Skurka noted. It was also the only one that Conrad Black was in charge of; Mr. Radler took care of every other deal that was mentioned in the indictment. The members of the defense team didn’t turn on each other (become fissiparous), even though it isn’t “completely unified.” Ms. Todd herself noted that the other defendants are distancing themselves from Conrad Black.
The complexity of the case, Csr. Skurka ventured with tongue somewhat in cheek near the end of his segment, brings up the question: can the very rich get a fair trial?
According to Ms. Todd's next guest, though, Mr. Black's wealth may very well be shrinking to a whole new level. Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall, estimated that, before the trial, Mr. Black owned $300 million in the Ravelston/Hollinger group of companies, and $100 million personally. According to Mr. Siklos, Black may be close to broke now, or at least close to illiquidity; he spent several minutes of the interview explaining why. Ms. Todd was skeptical, though.
The last segment had two guests: Ted Chung, a former prosecutor, and Leonard Cavise, a law professor. Csr. Chung was in the courtroom, and he thought that the opening statements were fascinating in their own right. He complimented Csr. Safer as being shrewdly independent in his address. Any risk of juror incomprehension that Csr. Chung saw in the trial itself was mitigated by repetition.
According to Prof. Cavise, Csr. Genson comes into his own when the trial content gets boring. 80% of the time, jurors make up their mind at the time of the opening statements, hence the stirring ones made in this trial. The professor then offered open advice for Mr. Kipnis: he should pull a fade and distance himself from Mr. Black. Perhaps the reason why Mr. Kipnis faced so many charges, despite him receiving virtually no money from any of the transactions that form the base of the indictment, is that the prosecution wanted him to roll, as David Radler did.
In her "closing argument," Ms. Todd opined that Barbara Black will be enough to mitigate any courtroom boredom, once her own activities, including her E-mail exchanges with her husband, are brought in to the trial.
(The middle segments of tonight's episode of The Verdict were devoted to the Phil Spector trial and a discussion about legalizing prostitution in Canada.)
The first was regular Steve Skurka. In his opinion, the defense “won the day.” Ron Safer, the lawyer for Mark Kipnis, disclosed that the Hollinger International audit committee, Torys LLP and KPMG all knew of and approved the non-compete transactions for the CanWest deal. [MSNBC has a writeup on this part of Csr. Safer's opening address. The firm identified as "a top law firm in Canada" is Torys.] The CanWest transaction is only one part of the entire group of transactions flagged in the indictment, but it is the largest, Csr. Skurka noted. It was also the only one that Conrad Black was in charge of; Mr. Radler took care of every other deal that was mentioned in the indictment. The members of the defense team didn’t turn on each other (become fissiparous), even though it isn’t “completely unified.” Ms. Todd herself noted that the other defendants are distancing themselves from Conrad Black.
The complexity of the case, Csr. Skurka ventured with tongue somewhat in cheek near the end of his segment, brings up the question: can the very rich get a fair trial?
According to Ms. Todd's next guest, though, Mr. Black's wealth may very well be shrinking to a whole new level. Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall, estimated that, before the trial, Mr. Black owned $300 million in the Ravelston/Hollinger group of companies, and $100 million personally. According to Mr. Siklos, Black may be close to broke now, or at least close to illiquidity; he spent several minutes of the interview explaining why. Ms. Todd was skeptical, though.
The last segment had two guests: Ted Chung, a former prosecutor, and Leonard Cavise, a law professor. Csr. Chung was in the courtroom, and he thought that the opening statements were fascinating in their own right. He complimented Csr. Safer as being shrewdly independent in his address. Any risk of juror incomprehension that Csr. Chung saw in the trial itself was mitigated by repetition.
According to Prof. Cavise, Csr. Genson comes into his own when the trial content gets boring. 80% of the time, jurors make up their mind at the time of the opening statements, hence the stirring ones made in this trial. The professor then offered open advice for Mr. Kipnis: he should pull a fade and distance himself from Mr. Black. Perhaps the reason why Mr. Kipnis faced so many charges, despite him receiving virtually no money from any of the transactions that form the base of the indictment, is that the prosecution wanted him to roll, as David Radler did.
In her "closing argument," Ms. Todd opined that Barbara Black will be enough to mitigate any courtroom boredom, once her own activities, including her E-mail exchanges with her husband, are brought in to the trial.
(The middle segments of tonight's episode of The Verdict were devoted to the Phil Spector trial and a discussion about legalizing prostitution in Canada.)
An Hour With Paris
The CBC has this CP item, which not only describes the two opening statements but also has a quick summary of Mr. Paris' first hour of testimony. Part of it: "Prosecutor Eric Sussman began taking Paris through his history at Hollinger International, his dealings with Black and the three other defendants and his impressions about how aware he felt they all were about the company's finances."
[UPDATE : Mr. Paris' initial testimony met with a lot of objections from Csr. Genson, as reported in this item by Romina Maurino. It got to the point where, according to Ms. Maurino, "Genson asked the judge if he could question Paris after a number of objections to the government's discussion," which Judge St. Eve assented to, and then he began "grilling [Mr. Paris] about whether he had himself put together the organizational chart he was discussing." There's more about the fireworks in the report itself, as well as a brief description of Conrad Black's reaction to seeing Gordon Paris testify.
[More detail about the substance of Mr. Paris' testimony can be found here, courtesy of the Belleville News-Democrat, in Illinois.]
Also: from the Chicago Tribune's "Hypertext" blog, the Conrad Black trial made item #3 on today's "High Five list." Given the way things went in Mr. Paris' hour of testimony, it may very well make tomorrow's top 5.
[UPDATE: It didn't.]
[UPDATE : Mr. Paris' initial testimony met with a lot of objections from Csr. Genson, as reported in this item by Romina Maurino. It got to the point where, according to Ms. Maurino, "Genson asked the judge if he could question Paris after a number of objections to the government's discussion," which Judge St. Eve assented to, and then he began "grilling [Mr. Paris] about whether he had himself put together the organizational chart he was discussing." There's more about the fireworks in the report itself, as well as a brief description of Conrad Black's reaction to seeing Gordon Paris testify.
[More detail about the substance of Mr. Paris' testimony can be found here, courtesy of the Belleville News-Democrat, in Illinois.]
Also: from the Chicago Tribune's "Hypertext" blog, the Conrad Black trial made item #3 on today's "High Five list." Given the way things went in Mr. Paris' hour of testimony, it may very well make tomorrow's top 5.
[UPDATE: It didn't.]
The Indictment, And The Evidentiary Proffer: First Iteration
I have gone through both the indictment and the evidentiary proffer. It's linked to on this page, with the link to the indictment itself carrying the title "Superseding Information." I'm not a lawyer; I'm not even an American. So, I have to confine myself to impressions that I picked up while reading them.
What's apparent, in terms of the drafting, is that the U.S. attorney's office has a culture of thoroughness. One single wiring of funds, from Conrad Black's CIBC account in Toronto to Hollinger Int'l's Bank One account in Chicago, is described as "interstate commerce" in Count Twelve, and as "interstate and foreign commerce" in both count 13 and Count 15, Racketeering Act Seven. ("Superseding Information," pp. 54, 55, 67.) Yes, indeed, they were thorough. In the evidentiary proffer, page 27, the drafter(s) were thorough enough to include the standard accounting term "unusual items." [Example of its use here.] Also included was a statement from Conrad Black, made to a reporter on August 28, 2003. As transcribed in the report: "We have paid non-competition fees countless times in acquisitions we have made in the United States and elsewhere and have always paid them to individuals."
Quote thorough of the prosecution team. I cannot comment further on what's in there, as I would be venturing beyond my range of knowledge. The only law I know is a smattering of Canadian law, picked up from a high-school course on it and from what I've soaked up through an entire life spent almost always in Canada.
What's apparent, in terms of the drafting, is that the U.S. attorney's office has a culture of thoroughness. One single wiring of funds, from Conrad Black's CIBC account in Toronto to Hollinger Int'l's Bank One account in Chicago, is described as "interstate commerce" in Count Twelve, and as "interstate and foreign commerce" in both count 13 and Count 15, Racketeering Act Seven. ("Superseding Information," pp. 54, 55, 67.) Yes, indeed, they were thorough. In the evidentiary proffer, page 27, the drafter(s) were thorough enough to include the standard accounting term "unusual items." [Example of its use here.] Also included was a statement from Conrad Black, made to a reporter on August 28, 2003. As transcribed in the report: "We have paid non-competition fees countless times in acquisitions we have made in the United States and elsewhere and have always paid them to individuals."
Quote thorough of the prosecution team. I cannot comment further on what's in there, as I would be venturing beyond my range of knowledge. The only law I know is a smattering of Canadian law, picked up from a high-school course on it and from what I've soaked up through an entire life spent almost always in Canada.
A Friend In A High Place
is clearly on the vindication side. William Lord Rees-Mogg, a former editor of the Times of London, has been a friend of Conrad Black for approximately thirty years. In defense of his old friend, Lord Rees-Mogg discloses that parties, of the sort that are mentioned in Count 10 of the indictment (point 8 of it - the birthday party,) are customarily treated as business expenses in the media industry. He also mentions the point that Conrad Black, even as an independent, was a competitive threat in the newspaper industry, and "Hollinger" was little more than a holding company without Mr. Black's presence and energies. As mentioned in this earlier post, Mark Steyn made a similar point, one buttressed by the chart of what used to be Hollinger Int'l, from about December 2003 (Nov. 17, specifically.) [This chart lets you adjust it to that timeframe.] Hopes rose along with the price of the stock in 2004, which went downhill, except for secondary upturns, ever since. If you had bought it on the next business day after Conrad Black had resigned, you'd have lost about 2/3 of your money as of now. [CORRECTION NOTICE: This calculation ignores a $5.50/share special dividend declared in Feb. 2005, while Gordon Paris was the CEO. A total-return calculation results in a much gentler decline.]
Lord Rees-Mogg closes his defense with the conclusion that Conrad Black, if guilty of anything, is "guilty" of being too much of a risk-taker, a habit which, if deplorable at times, is far from illegal and is often a needed one in a thriving economy.
[UPDATE: Conrad Black has responded in a letter to the Times, which denies that he is a new Gatsby. Excerpt: "'I accept the sentiment but not the analogy. William seems to imagine that while I may well be acquitted, my world has somewhat imploded, like Gatsby’s. I don’t think so.'" He made another point, which prompted a clarification from Lord Rees-Mogg.
[This is London has also picked up on Conrad Black's distancing of himself from Lord Rees-Mogg's analogy, as has Romina Maurino. Her report contains a quick precis of the fate of Jay Gatsby in it.
[The blog "DealBreaker.com" has a brief entry on this event.]
----------
Another defender of Mr. Black can be found right here on Blogspot. bussorah of "Strange Justice" believes that Mr. Black is a victim of overzealous prosecutors and a general climate of disgust with "gluttonous" top executives. As the title of the entry specifies, bussorah is of the opinion that "CONRAD BLACK [is] TO BE A VICTIM OF SUBORNED TESTIMONY."
Lord Rees-Mogg closes his defense with the conclusion that Conrad Black, if guilty of anything, is "guilty" of being too much of a risk-taker, a habit which, if deplorable at times, is far from illegal and is often a needed one in a thriving economy.
[UPDATE: Conrad Black has responded in a letter to the Times, which denies that he is a new Gatsby. Excerpt: "'I accept the sentiment but not the analogy. William seems to imagine that while I may well be acquitted, my world has somewhat imploded, like Gatsby’s. I don’t think so.'" He made another point, which prompted a clarification from Lord Rees-Mogg.
[This is London has also picked up on Conrad Black's distancing of himself from Lord Rees-Mogg's analogy, as has Romina Maurino. Her report contains a quick precis of the fate of Jay Gatsby in it.
[The blog "DealBreaker.com" has a brief entry on this event.]
----------
Another defender of Mr. Black can be found right here on Blogspot. bussorah of "Strange Justice" believes that Mr. Black is a victim of overzealous prosecutors and a general climate of disgust with "gluttonous" top executives. As the title of the entry specifies, bussorah is of the opinion that "CONRAD BLACK [is] TO BE A VICTIM OF SUBORNED TESTIMONY."
Whups
In one of the earlier entries in this blog, I had written that the prosecution had 12 peremptory challenges and the defense team had 18 between them. According to this webbed copy of Title 18 of the United States Code section VI (Jury Selection), though, the prosecution would have nine in total, and the defense would have a total of thirteen, because there are six alternate jurors. Three of each side's 9 and 13, repectively, have to be used against alternate jurors.
So, I at least evidently, was mistaken on this point. Further evidence that the systems in Canada and the United States differ, sometime by quite a bit. Admittedly, I should have checked my facts more closely before charging ahead.
So, I at least evidently, was mistaken on this point. Further evidence that the systems in Canada and the United States differ, sometime by quite a bit. Admittedly, I should have checked my facts more closely before charging ahead.
New Release of Csr. Genson's Opening Remarks
This report is so detailed, it's moving towards transcript level. Almost all of it is Csr. Genson's own words.
Last opening statement over
According to this report, the lawyer for Mark Kipnis, Ron Safer, argued that his client got nothing out of the non-compete agreements, and that that he was simply wrong on crucial points. Being wrong isn't a crime.
There's another report, by Romina Maurino, which includes the latest now-typically terse morning quote from Conrad Black: "I feel fine." It also includes the fact that Peter Atkinson and Jack Boultbee's lawyer finished yesterday. A Reuters report is webbed also, with a broken-in-two quote from Csr. Safer's opening statement. "'He's not perfect, perhaps he's negligent,' Safer said. But accepting a bonus for one of [the] non-compete payments in question 'was an honest mistake,' he added..."
This CBC report contians this excerpt from Csr. Safer's address: "'He [Kipnis] has had during the entire course of his employment at Hollinger at most five conversations with Conrad Black,' Safer said. 'He was an outsider.'"
An Associated Press report has been written on Csr. Safer's opening statement. It's been webbed by the Chicago Sun-Times, and it identifies Black as a "full-fledged British baron." It also discloses that, in his opening statement, Csr. Safer said that Mr. Kipnis was "unsophisticated in the ways of newspapers and corporate securities."
[UPDATE: There's also a Bloomberg report now. This report has the name of Jack Boultbee's lawyer, Gustave Newman, who himself is finished his address, so they're all over with.]
[In addition, this CBC report contains this excerpt from Csr. Safer's address: "'He [Kipnis] has had during the entire course of his employment at Hollinger at most five conversations with Conrad Black,' Safer said. 'He was an outsider.'" It also refers to "the [unnamed in that write-up] lawyer for Atkinson."]
There's another report, by Romina Maurino, which includes the latest now-typically terse morning quote from Conrad Black: "I feel fine." It also includes the fact that Peter Atkinson and Jack Boultbee's lawyer finished yesterday. A Reuters report is webbed also, with a broken-in-two quote from Csr. Safer's opening statement. "'He's not perfect, perhaps he's negligent,' Safer said. But accepting a bonus for one of [the] non-compete payments in question 'was an honest mistake,' he added..."
This CBC report contians this excerpt from Csr. Safer's address: "'He [Kipnis] has had during the entire course of his employment at Hollinger at most five conversations with Conrad Black,' Safer said. 'He was an outsider.'"
An Associated Press report has been written on Csr. Safer's opening statement. It's been webbed by the Chicago Sun-Times, and it identifies Black as a "full-fledged British baron." It also discloses that, in his opening statement, Csr. Safer said that Mr. Kipnis was "unsophisticated in the ways of newspapers and corporate securities."
[UPDATE: There's also a Bloomberg report now. This report has the name of Jack Boultbee's lawyer, Gustave Newman, who himself is finished his address, so they're all over with.]
[In addition, this CBC report contains this excerpt from Csr. Safer's address: "'He [Kipnis] has had during the entire course of his employment at Hollinger at most five conversations with Conrad Black,' Safer said. 'He was an outsider.'" It also refers to "the [unnamed in that write-up] lawyer for Atkinson."]
Gordon Paris: Fact Sheet From Black Books
The following data are distilled from two books on Conrad Black, Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall by Richard Siklos and Conrad & Lady Black by Tom Bower - primarily the former, as the quotes show:
Gordon Paris called for Conrad Black's ouster as chairman and CEO of Hollinger International in the Jan. 20, 2004 board meeting. Ostensibly, this was prompted by Mr. Black's pleading the Fifth in the SEC investigation, but his undercutting of a tacit agreement with investment banking form Lazard Freres, through him directly negotiating with interested would-be purchasers Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay, may have been the real reason. At that same directors' meeting, Mr. Paris proposed that a corporate review board be set up to review the Barclays' offer for the Telegraph Group. [They got it as of July 30, 2004.]
Mr. Paris was brought into Hollinger Int'l as a “financial expert.” Putting one on the board was mandated by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (Shades of Black, pp. 370-1.) He was also put on the special investigative committee on past payments, one announced by Conrad Black at the 2003 annual meeting (Ibid, pp. 367-8.) So was Richard Seitz, the director who brought up the Fifth to the Board, including to Mr. Black, as the reason for him to be fired. Siklos described Mr. Paris as having a “tightly coiled, no-bullshit demeanor” (Ibid, p. 379,) but Mr. Paris’ righteousness had slowly became questionable in the eyes of Dan Colson, Hollinger Int’l new COO when Paris became CEO (Ibid, pp. 398-9.) Mr. Colson is an old associate of Conrad Black, and is a minor shareholder of the top holding company, Ravelston, now in receivership.
As of 2004, Gordon Paris believed that Conrad Black’s sense of entitlement was “over the top - way over the top” (Paris quote from Ibid, p. 454.) Mr. Black publicly opined that he was fired and ousted by Paris and the rest of the board, as was advised by Richard Breeden, to protect their own behinds. (Ibid, p. xv)
[UPDATE: In BNN's "Lunch Money," it was noted that Gordon Paris brokered the deal with David Radler. FYI.]
Gordon Paris called for Conrad Black's ouster as chairman and CEO of Hollinger International in the Jan. 20, 2004 board meeting. Ostensibly, this was prompted by Mr. Black's pleading the Fifth in the SEC investigation, but his undercutting of a tacit agreement with investment banking form Lazard Freres, through him directly negotiating with interested would-be purchasers Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay, may have been the real reason. At that same directors' meeting, Mr. Paris proposed that a corporate review board be set up to review the Barclays' offer for the Telegraph Group. [They got it as of July 30, 2004.]
Mr. Paris was brought into Hollinger Int'l as a “financial expert.” Putting one on the board was mandated by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (Shades of Black, pp. 370-1.) He was also put on the special investigative committee on past payments, one announced by Conrad Black at the 2003 annual meeting (Ibid, pp. 367-8.) So was Richard Seitz, the director who brought up the Fifth to the Board, including to Mr. Black, as the reason for him to be fired. Siklos described Mr. Paris as having a “tightly coiled, no-bullshit demeanor” (Ibid, p. 379,) but Mr. Paris’ righteousness had slowly became questionable in the eyes of Dan Colson, Hollinger Int’l new COO when Paris became CEO (Ibid, pp. 398-9.) Mr. Colson is an old associate of Conrad Black, and is a minor shareholder of the top holding company, Ravelston, now in receivership.
As of 2004, Gordon Paris believed that Conrad Black’s sense of entitlement was “over the top - way over the top” (Paris quote from Ibid, p. 454.) Mr. Black publicly opined that he was fired and ousted by Paris and the rest of the board, as was advised by Richard Breeden, to protect their own behinds. (Ibid, p. xv)
[UPDATE: In BNN's "Lunch Money," it was noted that Gordon Paris brokered the deal with David Radler. FYI.]
Media Roundup: Facts and Fancies
Today's list of media links on the Conrad Black trial:
1. The Chicago Tribune has a detailed report, which presents both points of view, prosecution's and defense's, laced in with description of yesterday's trial events. [Registration required.]
2. Anticipatory notice of the testimony of the first witness, Gordon Paris.
3. A Toronto Star piece, by Rick Westhead, which raises the possibility of an all-woman jury, a contingency that could occur if the four men are dropped from it. Mr. Westhead notes that the preponderance of women means that the prosecution is downplaying spendthrift stereotypes and emphasizing corner-cutting.
4. A column in the Chicago Sun-Times, on the theme of seeing the former top boss on trial. The author, Mark Brown, admits to his inclination for seeing a comeuppance.
5. A report from the Baltimore Sun.
6. Slate has a report on the trial in their "Jurisprudence" section.
7. Write-up in the National Post, which describes the defense's own categorization of Mr. Black and Mr. Radler as, contrary to their more-well-known roles of concept man (Black) and detail man (Radler), co-chiefs of different geographical regions. [No "two kings of Sparta" jokes, though.]
8. A more tongue-in-cheek writeup from the Globe and Mail, with faux-moralizing included. The author of it is, evidently, on the vindication side.
9. An item in the Hamilton Spectator, written by the Canadian Press reporter put on this story, Romina Maurino.
10. A report in the Daily Express, from none other than...Joanna Walters. She notes that Conrad Black ticked the "Personal" box, for trip description, in his custom form when traveling to Bora Bora.
11. A more lively report from This Is London. Describes Judge St. Eve as "feisty."
12. From the Telegraph: the challenges of explaining the technicalities of the case to a blue-collar jury. This report points out that both the prosecution and defense are using the example of a restaurant sold from one party to another. It contains an example of Csr. Genson's wit: "'And by the end of this case, I'm going to teach him not to lie back in his chair,' he said."
13. A brief writeup from "To The Center," which contains the name of the fellow who got the ball rolling on this case, disgruntled investor Chris Browne.
14. A one paragraph squib in The Anorak, entitled "Courtroom Drama," with links to two tabloid stories on the trial.
15. Maclean's "Daily Update." The recap part of it, in the fifth paragraph, points out a discrepancy between Csr. Cramer's opening statment and the government's charges, which is explained in this March 26th story by Romina Maurino of the Canadian Press: the $60 million is the total dollar amount in theft-related charges in which all four defendants are mentioned. Maclean's seems to be a vindication-oriented source; its editor-in-chief, Ken Whyte, is a potential defense witness.
16. The same magazine also has Mark Steyn, an explicitly pro-vindication journalist, blogging his coverage of the trial. It's updated more than once in the trial day. [Thanks to "Bloodthirsty Liberal" for highlighting it, in a pro-vindication entry.]
17. The Associated Press writeup, also with trial news from today, posted on Business Week's Website.
Also: Maisonneuve has a round-up of its own, which includes a link (amongst others) to a Christie Blatchford report on the jurors' appearance; to view it in full, a subscription to the Globe and Mail is required.
And finally: an editorial, presumptively on the comeuppance side...from the Wall Street Journal. [Subscription required to read it in full.]
1. The Chicago Tribune has a detailed report, which presents both points of view, prosecution's and defense's, laced in with description of yesterday's trial events. [Registration required.]
2. Anticipatory notice of the testimony of the first witness, Gordon Paris.
3. A Toronto Star piece, by Rick Westhead, which raises the possibility of an all-woman jury, a contingency that could occur if the four men are dropped from it. Mr. Westhead notes that the preponderance of women means that the prosecution is downplaying spendthrift stereotypes and emphasizing corner-cutting.
4. A column in the Chicago Sun-Times, on the theme of seeing the former top boss on trial. The author, Mark Brown, admits to his inclination for seeing a comeuppance.
5. A report from the Baltimore Sun.
6. Slate has a report on the trial in their "Jurisprudence" section.
7. Write-up in the National Post, which describes the defense's own categorization of Mr. Black and Mr. Radler as, contrary to their more-well-known roles of concept man (Black) and detail man (Radler), co-chiefs of different geographical regions. [No "two kings of Sparta" jokes, though.]
8. A more tongue-in-cheek writeup from the Globe and Mail, with faux-moralizing included. The author of it is, evidently, on the vindication side.
9. An item in the Hamilton Spectator, written by the Canadian Press reporter put on this story, Romina Maurino.
10. A report in the Daily Express, from none other than...Joanna Walters. She notes that Conrad Black ticked the "Personal" box, for trip description, in his custom form when traveling to Bora Bora.
11. A more lively report from This Is London. Describes Judge St. Eve as "feisty."
12. From the Telegraph: the challenges of explaining the technicalities of the case to a blue-collar jury. This report points out that both the prosecution and defense are using the example of a restaurant sold from one party to another. It contains an example of Csr. Genson's wit: "'And by the end of this case, I'm going to teach him not to lie back in his chair,' he said."
13. A brief writeup from "To The Center," which contains the name of the fellow who got the ball rolling on this case, disgruntled investor Chris Browne.
14. A one paragraph squib in The Anorak, entitled "Courtroom Drama," with links to two tabloid stories on the trial.
15. Maclean's "Daily Update." The recap part of it, in the fifth paragraph, points out a discrepancy between Csr. Cramer's opening statment and the government's charges, which is explained in this March 26th story by Romina Maurino of the Canadian Press: the $60 million is the total dollar amount in theft-related charges in which all four defendants are mentioned. Maclean's seems to be a vindication-oriented source; its editor-in-chief, Ken Whyte, is a potential defense witness.
16. The same magazine also has Mark Steyn, an explicitly pro-vindication journalist, blogging his coverage of the trial. It's updated more than once in the trial day. [Thanks to "Bloodthirsty Liberal" for highlighting it, in a pro-vindication entry.]
17. The Associated Press writeup, also with trial news from today, posted on Business Week's Website.
Also: Maisonneuve has a round-up of its own, which includes a link (amongst others) to a Christie Blatchford report on the jurors' appearance; to view it in full, a subscription to the Globe and Mail is required.
And finally: an editorial, presumptively on the comeuppance side...from the Wall Street Journal. [Subscription required to read it in full.]
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Interview About Conrad Black on CBC's "The National"
The interview, on The National, was with Richard Siklos, the author of Shades of Black: Conrad Black - His Rise and Fall. Mr. Siklos counted the trial at this point as a “standstill,” but concluded that this leaves Conrad Black with the advantage. Csr. Cramer actually tried to stare Black down, from in front of the defense table while making those personal accusations, but to no avail; Mr. Black just stared ahead. Csr. Genson said in his opening statement that the case was so complex, it was hard for even he to understand, which got a smile out of the jurors. The jurors themselves were middle-majority types.
Black himself was characteristically grim, but was relatively lighter when his own lawyer spoke. He slouched in his chair, which Csr. Gerson joked about. David Radler, Siklos opined, won’t show up for his time on the stand until a few weeks later. It has to be shown in the trial that Mr. Black and Mr. Radler had completely different responsibilities, something that, Mr. Siklos added, will be very hard to establish.
Black himself was characteristically grim, but was relatively lighter when his own lawyer spoke. He slouched in his chair, which Csr. Gerson joked about. David Radler, Siklos opined, won’t show up for his time on the stand until a few weeks later. It has to be shown in the trial that Mr. Black and Mr. Radler had completely different responsibilities, something that, Mr. Siklos added, will be very hard to establish.
The Verdict: Opening Arguments, And Mrs. Black's "Opener."
This episode started off with a brief recap. Ms. Todd noted that Csr. Cramer compared Black to a bank robber, and that Csr. Genson said that Black was the one who was robbed.
Lisa LaFlamme started her report off by admitting that the technical details of the case went over her head. [This may have had something to do with it.] She then continued with these observations: as the diagrams were shown, Csr. Gensen was the centre of attention; he explained Black’s foibles in a folksy way, saying that Black even tires him. She thought that Csr. Cramer did a very good, “dramatic,” job, but the details were quite complex.
After Ms. LaFlamme’s observations came a three-way interview-discussion with Steve Sturka and Terry Sullivan, a jury expert. Mr. Sullivan started off, and observed that the two sides ended with a tie. Csr. Skurka disagreed; he argued that the defense won hands-down. One reason why was the prosecutor indulging in histrionics.
Mr. Sullivan was asked by Ms. Todd if the prosecution has been condescending, too eager to simplify; he replied that this was Chicago. He thought that Mr. Black would have a better chance with a trial with a judge alone. (Csr. Skurka disagreed with this call.) He then was asked by Ms. Todd about problems with running a public company, which Donald Trump had brought up earlier; he agreed, and added that heading up a public company does carry special responsibilities, and a proprietorship attitude doesn’t work. (At this point, Csr. Skurka brought up a cheap shot, which, as Ms. Todd noted, was successfully objected to.) Mr. Sullivan brought up the possibility that Conrad Black will go on the stand; the prior odds of trials in this building says that he will. Csr. Skurka agreed that Mr. Black will testify, and opined that Csr. Genson softened the jury up for it. Ms. Todd, at the end of this segment, kiddingly played the judge for the two....
This episode of The Verdict ended with Ms. Todd’s own "closing argument," which was about the crowding in the courtroom. The trial is becoming more popular. There are 80 seats for what is now approximately 200 journalists; the rest have to go to overflow rooms. The journalists in those rooms were shut off from an important part of the story, as the cameras didn’t show the flashcards that the people in the courtroom saw. There should have more cameras in the courtroom…and the judge could move the trial to a different, larger, courtroom as well.
Lisa LaFlamme started her report off by admitting that the technical details of the case went over her head. [This may have had something to do with it.] She then continued with these observations: as the diagrams were shown, Csr. Gensen was the centre of attention; he explained Black’s foibles in a folksy way, saying that Black even tires him. She thought that Csr. Cramer did a very good, “dramatic,” job, but the details were quite complex.
After Ms. LaFlamme’s observations came a three-way interview-discussion with Steve Sturka and Terry Sullivan, a jury expert. Mr. Sullivan started off, and observed that the two sides ended with a tie. Csr. Skurka disagreed; he argued that the defense won hands-down. One reason why was the prosecutor indulging in histrionics.
Mr. Sullivan was asked by Ms. Todd if the prosecution has been condescending, too eager to simplify; he replied that this was Chicago. He thought that Mr. Black would have a better chance with a trial with a judge alone. (Csr. Skurka disagreed with this call.) He then was asked by Ms. Todd about problems with running a public company, which Donald Trump had brought up earlier; he agreed, and added that heading up a public company does carry special responsibilities, and a proprietorship attitude doesn’t work. (At this point, Csr. Skurka brought up a cheap shot, which, as Ms. Todd noted, was successfully objected to.) Mr. Sullivan brought up the possibility that Conrad Black will go on the stand; the prior odds of trials in this building says that he will. Csr. Skurka agreed that Mr. Black will testify, and opined that Csr. Genson softened the jury up for it. Ms. Todd, at the end of this segment, kiddingly played the judge for the two....
This episode of The Verdict ended with Ms. Todd’s own "closing argument," which was about the crowding in the courtroom. The trial is becoming more popular. There are 80 seats for what is now approximately 200 journalists; the rest have to go to overflow rooms. The journalists in those rooms were shut off from an important part of the story, as the cameras didn’t show the flashcards that the people in the courtroom saw. There should have more cameras in the courtroom…and the judge could move the trial to a different, larger, courtroom as well.
The Latest From CTV
On CTV NewsNet, Steve Skurka noted that the procedure used to vet the jury in Judge St. Eve's courtroom is quite different from what a Canadian judge would have used: either a mistrial would have been declared, or else the jurors would have been questioned in a sitting court, letting the prosecution and defense hear. With regard to the former, though, he noted that re-selection of a jury could take months for this case, so it's not that surprising that a mistrial was not declared.
[UPDATE: Judge St. Eve will be checking if the jurors have read reports on either of the settlements with Mr. Radler, and whether jurors have been influenced by any reports that they have read. It is still likely that the trial will proceed according to the revised schedule, with opening arguments starting this morning. His prediction: The first witness will be on the stand as of noon tomorrow.]
[UPDATE 2, Csr. Skurka's summation of the prosecutor's opening statement: the opening argument resembled a closing address to him. It included a brief description of Conrad Black’s rise. Csr. Cramer said later that Mr. Black lost his original “vision,” and consequently got rid of smaller community newspapers. Cramer described the non-compete agreements (at the heart of the first nine of the charges) as a “scheme.” They weren’t required for the sales of the newspapers, even though Mr. Black said that they were. The prosecutor described the defendants as “sophisticated,” and at the end, pointed to all of them and proclaimed them all to be guilty.]
(A Reuters revised report on the prosecution's opening statement has been posted. So has one in the North County Times of California, which contains these two quotes from Csr. Cramer: the defendants had made a "'bold money grab'," and a more detailed one: '"They thought that they were being told the truth because they had no need to doubt it,' Cramer said of the board members. 'But they weren't.'
'"Same thing with the auditors, same thing with the shareholders. They lied to them,' he said.")
[Skurka also summarized what part of the defense's argument he had heard, as of about 1 PM EDT, or 12 PM CDT. Csr. Genson denied any parallel between the Enron case and this one. He further said that Hollinger Int'l was in fact stolen from Black. The charges are an “outrage.” As of time of Csr. Skurka's report, Genson was recounting Black’s history. ]
[UPDATE 3: Subsequent to that last report, Skurka added that Csr. Genson had impressed the jury; they like him, and were responsive to his delivery. The company fell apart, according to Genson, because of corporate governance issues, not because of Conrad Black. Csr. Genson brought up Radler needing to settle for business reasons, and that Izzy Asper did require the non-compete agreement, as it was actually carved out, as part of the CanWest sale deal. ]
[UPDATE 4: Lisa LaFlamme has reported that the infamous box-removal tapes, filmed on security cam at 10 Toronto Street, were part of the prosecution's opening-statement presentation. This National Post write-up contains the defense response to those tapes: "Mr. Genson countered that Lord Black's lawyers had not yet been served papers by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission when he removed some personal effects including family photos and some copies of other documents." It also discloses that Csr. Gerson intends to prove that Conrad Black paid for the Bora Bora trip himself.]
He also brought up the possibility of Barbara Black testifying for the defense, but concluded that it was quite unlikely, given her outburst. The risk that she may react in a similar way on the witness stand is just too great for the defense team to take that chance.
[UPDATE: Judge St. Eve will be checking if the jurors have read reports on either of the settlements with Mr. Radler, and whether jurors have been influenced by any reports that they have read. It is still likely that the trial will proceed according to the revised schedule, with opening arguments starting this morning. His prediction: The first witness will be on the stand as of noon tomorrow.]
[UPDATE 2, Csr. Skurka's summation of the prosecutor's opening statement: the opening argument resembled a closing address to him. It included a brief description of Conrad Black’s rise. Csr. Cramer said later that Mr. Black lost his original “vision,” and consequently got rid of smaller community newspapers. Cramer described the non-compete agreements (at the heart of the first nine of the charges) as a “scheme.” They weren’t required for the sales of the newspapers, even though Mr. Black said that they were. The prosecutor described the defendants as “sophisticated,” and at the end, pointed to all of them and proclaimed them all to be guilty.]
(A Reuters revised report on the prosecution's opening statement has been posted. So has one in the North County Times of California, which contains these two quotes from Csr. Cramer: the defendants had made a "'bold money grab'," and a more detailed one: '"They thought that they were being told the truth because they had no need to doubt it,' Cramer said of the board members. 'But they weren't.'
'"Same thing with the auditors, same thing with the shareholders. They lied to them,' he said.")
[Skurka also summarized what part of the defense's argument he had heard, as of about 1 PM EDT, or 12 PM CDT. Csr. Genson denied any parallel between the Enron case and this one. He further said that Hollinger Int'l was in fact stolen from Black. The charges are an “outrage.” As of time of Csr. Skurka's report, Genson was recounting Black’s history. ]
[UPDATE 3: Subsequent to that last report, Skurka added that Csr. Genson had impressed the jury; they like him, and were responsive to his delivery. The company fell apart, according to Genson, because of corporate governance issues, not because of Conrad Black. Csr. Genson brought up Radler needing to settle for business reasons, and that Izzy Asper did require the non-compete agreement, as it was actually carved out, as part of the CanWest sale deal. ]
[UPDATE 4: Lisa LaFlamme has reported that the infamous box-removal tapes, filmed on security cam at 10 Toronto Street, were part of the prosecution's opening-statement presentation. This National Post write-up contains the defense response to those tapes: "Mr. Genson countered that Lord Black's lawyers had not yet been served papers by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission when he removed some personal effects including family photos and some copies of other documents." It also discloses that Csr. Gerson intends to prove that Conrad Black paid for the Bora Bora trip himself.]
He also brought up the possibility of Barbara Black testifying for the defense, but concluded that it was quite unlikely, given her outburst. The risk that she may react in a similar way on the witness stand is just too great for the defense team to take that chance.
The Latest From BNN
BNN's Amanda Lang reported that what caused the delay isn't certain as of now; no future delays are evident. There have been no comments from either prosecution or defense; in fact, they’ve been atypically tight-lipped, thanks to Judge St. Eve. She noted that the crowding publicity, which both Mr. and Mrs. Black have faced, do come with the territory in a trial such as this one; both, especially the latter party, should know that. Yesterday’s “procedural matters” were the striking of certain items from various submitted depositions, due to objections to some of their content.
[UPDATE: Csr. Cramer described the defendants as greedy and hubristic empire-builders in his opening statement. Also, BNN showed a statement from Mrs. Black, said by her this morning, in which she neither confirmed nor denied the specific content of those remarks of hers yesterday. She also said that she was referring to specific journalists, who "know who they are."]
[UPDATE 2: According to Lisa Oake, Csr. Genson "had the jury laughing" at the outset, and had continued with the observation that the prosecution was saying things that "just ain't true." According to BNN's Ms. Lang, the prosecutor said that Conrad Black wasn’t really the owner - even though he had owned a lot of it, she also noted. Neither the prosecution nor the defense called Black “Lord Black.” Csr. Genson also said that Black’s lifestyle and business life were “of a piece.”]
[UPDATE 3: According to the latest report from Ms. Lang, as of 5:50 EDT, there are 14 women and 4 men on the jury, with Caucasians predominating. The prosecution's opening statement was made “forcefully,” to compensate for the complexity of their case. Some transactions, according to Csr. Cramer, were “so fraudulent,” they were merely paper trades. Csr. Cramer also mentioned the trip to Bora Bora. The only opening statement of the defense, Csr. Genson's, was “less cogent,” according to Ms. Lang. According to Csr. Genson, everything was above-board in the Canwest deal; the other deals were orchestrated by Mr. Radler. There were no surprises today in the trial itself, except for a possible one for Canadians because of a cross-border difference in trial procedure: in Canada, the defense would open after the prosecution rests.]
[A Web news report on Cramer's opening statements, which adds details such as Csr. Gerson describing Black as "snotty" but innocent, is here. Another report, with quotes from Csr. Cramer and Csr. Genson's opening statements, is here. Sample quote, from Csr. Genson: "'David Radler (government's witness, the former No. 2 man in Black's organization) will come into this court and lie to you about Conrad Black.'" From Csr. Cramer, as lifted from the Financial Times: "We all know what a street crime looks like ... [This case is] exactly the same thing ... [except] they did it with memos and documents.'"]
[UPDATE: Csr. Cramer described the defendants as greedy and hubristic empire-builders in his opening statement. Also, BNN showed a statement from Mrs. Black, said by her this morning, in which she neither confirmed nor denied the specific content of those remarks of hers yesterday. She also said that she was referring to specific journalists, who "know who they are."]
[UPDATE 2: According to Lisa Oake, Csr. Genson "had the jury laughing" at the outset, and had continued with the observation that the prosecution was saying things that "just ain't true." According to BNN's Ms. Lang, the prosecutor said that Conrad Black wasn’t really the owner - even though he had owned a lot of it, she also noted. Neither the prosecution nor the defense called Black “Lord Black.” Csr. Genson also said that Black’s lifestyle and business life were “of a piece.”]
[UPDATE 3: According to the latest report from Ms. Lang, as of 5:50 EDT, there are 14 women and 4 men on the jury, with Caucasians predominating. The prosecution's opening statement was made “forcefully,” to compensate for the complexity of their case. Some transactions, according to Csr. Cramer, were “so fraudulent,” they were merely paper trades. Csr. Cramer also mentioned the trip to Bora Bora. The only opening statement of the defense, Csr. Genson's, was “less cogent,” according to Ms. Lang. According to Csr. Genson, everything was above-board in the Canwest deal; the other deals were orchestrated by Mr. Radler. There were no surprises today in the trial itself, except for a possible one for Canadians because of a cross-border difference in trial procedure: in Canada, the defense would open after the prosecution rests.]
[A Web news report on Cramer's opening statements, which adds details such as Csr. Gerson describing Black as "snotty" but innocent, is here. Another report, with quotes from Csr. Cramer and Csr. Genson's opening statements, is here. Sample quote, from Csr. Genson: "'David Radler (government's witness, the former No. 2 man in Black's organization) will come into this court and lie to you about Conrad Black.'" From Csr. Cramer, as lifted from the Financial Times: "We all know what a street crime looks like ... [This case is] exactly the same thing ... [except] they did it with memos and documents.'"]
The Latest From CBC
CBC News' Harry Forestell expects "another day of high drama” in the trial. The correspondent he interviewed, Kas Roussy, disclosed that the courtroom is already jammed, an hour before the trial's start. The first event, come 9 AM CDT, will probably be the jury swearing-in. Judge St. Eve may order juror identities to be kept secret. The graphics are being set up, as well as some electronic slides for presentation to the jury. With respect to the Barbara Black incident last night: the CBC producer so afflicted, Melanie Glanz, was following the Blacks, as she has done so since day one of the event. Ms. Roussy chalked up the explosion to “pressure.”
[UPDATE, from the last morning report from Ms. Roussy: The opening arguments have started, with Csr. Cramer saying that six- and even seven-figure salaries were not enough for the defendants; he accused them of stealing tens of millions of dollars. He also compared them to bank robbers: bank robbers had guns, defendants had suits. According to Ms. Roussy, the jury was sworn in expeditiously, and Judge St. Eve announced that the trial would likely take 12-16 weeks. The trial will not take place on Fridays. Ms. Roussy also mentioned that Mrs. Black believes that the trial is more important for her than yesterday's flap.]
[UPDATE 2, from the latest, 4 PM EDT, report: Csr. Genson told the jurors to disregard Mr. Black’s image and lifestyle; he’s “no different from you or I,” as Ms. Roussy reported. In her instructions to the jury, Judge St. Eve specified avoiding Internet coverage, as well as the regular media's, of the trial. Based upon today's opening statements, the case likely to be both “dramatic and complex,” to use the words that Ms. Roussy herself used near the end of her report.]
[A Web news report on the opening arguments can be found here. From it: "In his opening statement, prosecutor Jeffrey Cramer said, 'Bank robbers wear masks and use guns. Burglars wear dark clothing and use a crowbar. These four wore a suit and tie.'" Another one is here, which has a quote from Conrad Black, referring to "an epidemic of shareholder idiocy," that itself was quoted by Csr. Cramer, according to the item. CBC itself has an extensive item posted, written by Romina Maurino of the Canadian Press, as well as one of its own, which has the complete "sophisticated" line from the prosecution in it.]
[UPDATE, from the last morning report from Ms. Roussy: The opening arguments have started, with Csr. Cramer saying that six- and even seven-figure salaries were not enough for the defendants; he accused them of stealing tens of millions of dollars. He also compared them to bank robbers: bank robbers had guns, defendants had suits. According to Ms. Roussy, the jury was sworn in expeditiously, and Judge St. Eve announced that the trial would likely take 12-16 weeks. The trial will not take place on Fridays. Ms. Roussy also mentioned that Mrs. Black believes that the trial is more important for her than yesterday's flap.]
[UPDATE 2, from the latest, 4 PM EDT, report: Csr. Genson told the jurors to disregard Mr. Black’s image and lifestyle; he’s “no different from you or I,” as Ms. Roussy reported. In her instructions to the jury, Judge St. Eve specified avoiding Internet coverage, as well as the regular media's, of the trial. Based upon today's opening statements, the case likely to be both “dramatic and complex,” to use the words that Ms. Roussy herself used near the end of her report.]
[A Web news report on the opening arguments can be found here. From it: "In his opening statement, prosecutor Jeffrey Cramer said, 'Bank robbers wear masks and use guns. Burglars wear dark clothing and use a crowbar. These four wore a suit and tie.'" Another one is here, which has a quote from Conrad Black, referring to "an epidemic of shareholder idiocy," that itself was quoted by Csr. Cramer, according to the item. CBC itself has an extensive item posted, written by Romina Maurino of the Canadian Press, as well as one of its own, which has the complete "sophisticated" line from the prosecution in it.]
"Small Dead Animals": Whirlwind Reap
Kate of "Small Dead Animals" objected to Lisa LaFlamme "[pondering] out loud whether a jury of common Chicago folk was equipped to understand the legal and financial complexities that underpin the case." Her response is classic.
In my own opinion, however, Ms. LaFlamme was called on some on-air speculating. I myself haven't seen much that is objectionable in Ms. LaFlamme's reporting, so I would cast that remark as a slip-up. (If I'm too forgiving, given how much I myself have summed up Ms. LaFlamme's reporting on this blog, I'm in for more self-embarrassment.)
If you'd like to join in the growing media-bashing, or if you're just curious about the reaction to Kate's post, the comments section of that post is here.
As far as I know, Ms. LaFlamme never got the flak that Peter Worthington did. (See the end of this column, for a brief riposte to Mr. Worthington's Friday one on the trial, which made the same point that Ms. LaFlamme did. Mr. Worthington clarified what he was driving at in the last part of his latest column.)
To move back to the news watch: news of the Conrad Black trial has made it onto both CNBC's Website and CNNMoney's.
In my own opinion, however, Ms. LaFlamme was called on some on-air speculating. I myself haven't seen much that is objectionable in Ms. LaFlamme's reporting, so I would cast that remark as a slip-up. (If I'm too forgiving, given how much I myself have summed up Ms. LaFlamme's reporting on this blog, I'm in for more self-embarrassment.)
If you'd like to join in the growing media-bashing, or if you're just curious about the reaction to Kate's post, the comments section of that post is here.
As far as I know, Ms. LaFlamme never got the flak that Peter Worthington did. (See the end of this column, for a brief riposte to Mr. Worthington's Friday one on the trial, which made the same point that Ms. LaFlamme did. Mr. Worthington clarified what he was driving at in the last part of his latest column.)
To move back to the news watch: news of the Conrad Black trial has made it onto both CNBC's Website and CNNMoney's.
Law Prof Offers His Services To The Public (the media)
The professor is a former prosecutor in the Enron case: Samuel J. Buell, J.D. In this press release, issued in his name, he draws a parallel between the Conrad Black case and the Tyco case.
CBC interview with former prosecutor Robert Kent
This interview was just aired on CBC Newsworld. According to Csr. Kent, Judge St. Eve will warn jurors not to even discuss the case amongst themselves, and to avoid media reports on it. (These instructions aren't unusual in criminal trials.) The Radler settlements will probably change the defense’s opening arguments. Prosecutors will, according to Kent, concentrate upon educating the jury, telling them to “follow the money,” to focus on why the defendants would do what they've done, and to remember the fiduciary duties the defendants had to observe. The defense will probably impugn Mr. Radler's credibility, which Csr. Kent believes they “will have a pretty good shot” at. Conrad Black himself will deny any personal involvement in the suspicious transactions in question, and will blame the operating executives for any charge-inducing irregularities.
Media Roundup: Shattered
The stories that propagated overnight that covered the Conrad Black trial focused, primarily, on two issues that erupted yesterday: the one-day delay and, of course, Mrs. Black's outburst.
1. The New York Times wrapup managed to work both in, although the second got only spot coverage. It was careful enough to note that both the SEC settlement and the Sun-Times Media Group settlement could have prejudiced the jury. Csr. Greenspan was quoted, with regard to the elevator explosion, as saying that "it was particularly stressful for Ms. Amiel to be in a courtroom where the media representatives included the authors of two books whom her husband had sued for defamation over depictions of the Black’s relationship." It also mentioned that Patrick J. Fitzgerald was in the audience (perhaps to supervise the prosecutorial team.)
2. The Financial Times, as posted by MSN Money, notes that former Governor and former chair of the Hollinger audit committee, Richard Thompson, will testify for the defense.
3. The Illinois Daily Herald has a piece on Conrad Black himself, describing how his appearance has changed now that the trial is underway.
4. The ever-loquacious Donald Trump offered retrospective advice for Mr. Black, stating that Black went wrong by doing business through a public company. (He didn't talk about the trial, though.) Also in the Globe and Mail report: the precise Hollinger connection between Mr. Trump and Mr. Black. Mr. Trump bought a 50% stake in the Sun-Times site, and plans to build a skyscraper on it.
5. Peter Worthington's latest column discloses that the reason for the one-day delay in the trial was a suspected case of identity theft - the identity of one of the jurors. He also showed typical Canadian abashedness with respect to the controversy in Chicago surrounding his Friday column.
6. A daily update on the trial from Maclean's magazine, Net edition. It contains current trial information, "Latest Developments," on the top of the webpage.
7. A mid-column item from Maisonneuve, the columnlet titled "From The Mouth Of A Lady,"which notes that "he had allowed his two kids to play hookie from school and come watch Daddy at work."
8. The Australian has a sober recap of yesterday's courtroom action, as well as Mrs. Black's explosion. The focus is upon Mr. Black's demeanor, though.
9. More humourful is the Daily Herald's Burt Constable, who looks at the trial with tongue in cheek. Memorable line: "In court case headlines, Black is a distant second to 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus.'"
And finally: "Crikey" is back. Subscription required, but a free trial is available.
1. The New York Times wrapup managed to work both in, although the second got only spot coverage. It was careful enough to note that both the SEC settlement and the Sun-Times Media Group settlement could have prejudiced the jury. Csr. Greenspan was quoted, with regard to the elevator explosion, as saying that "it was particularly stressful for Ms. Amiel to be in a courtroom where the media representatives included the authors of two books whom her husband had sued for defamation over depictions of the Black’s relationship." It also mentioned that Patrick J. Fitzgerald was in the audience (perhaps to supervise the prosecutorial team.)
2. The Financial Times, as posted by MSN Money, notes that former Governor and former chair of the Hollinger audit committee, Richard Thompson, will testify for the defense.
3. The Illinois Daily Herald has a piece on Conrad Black himself, describing how his appearance has changed now that the trial is underway.
4. The ever-loquacious Donald Trump offered retrospective advice for Mr. Black, stating that Black went wrong by doing business through a public company. (He didn't talk about the trial, though.) Also in the Globe and Mail report: the precise Hollinger connection between Mr. Trump and Mr. Black. Mr. Trump bought a 50% stake in the Sun-Times site, and plans to build a skyscraper on it.
5. Peter Worthington's latest column discloses that the reason for the one-day delay in the trial was a suspected case of identity theft - the identity of one of the jurors. He also showed typical Canadian abashedness with respect to the controversy in Chicago surrounding his Friday column.
6. A daily update on the trial from Maclean's magazine, Net edition. It contains current trial information, "Latest Developments," on the top of the webpage.
7. A mid-column item from Maisonneuve, the columnlet titled "From The Mouth Of A Lady,"which notes that "he had allowed his two kids to play hookie from school and come watch Daddy at work."
8. The Australian has a sober recap of yesterday's courtroom action, as well as Mrs. Black's explosion. The focus is upon Mr. Black's demeanor, though.
9. More humourful is the Daily Herald's Burt Constable, who looks at the trial with tongue in cheek. Memorable line: "In court case headlines, Black is a distant second to 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus.'"
And finally: "Crikey" is back. Subscription required, but a free trial is available.
Just Released: Barbara Black's Defense
Accoring to this report, Mrs. Black said that the "vermin" remark, and the others that surrounded it while in that elevator yesterday afternoon, were part of a private conversation with her stepdaughter. In other words, the two journalists who overheard her and went public with it, Joanna Walters and Stefani Langnegger, were indulging in eavesdropping.
[Update: according to CTV's Lisa LaFlamme, Mrs. Black said those explanatory words calmly - she sounded somewhat warm when on camera.]
One of those two journalists, Joanna Walters with the Daily Express, appeared on last night's The Verdict. A Web report can be found here, which notes that Mr. Black refused to comment this morning. A CBC News report notes that Mrs. Black "later [the same day - yesterday] told an acquaintance twice within earshot of several reporters in the courtroom, 'I lost my cool today.'"
[Update: according to CTV's Lisa LaFlamme, Mrs. Black said those explanatory words calmly - she sounded somewhat warm when on camera.]
One of those two journalists, Joanna Walters with the Daily Express, appeared on last night's The Verdict. A Web report can be found here, which notes that Mr. Black refused to comment this morning. A CBC News report notes that Mrs. Black "later [the same day - yesterday] told an acquaintance twice within earshot of several reporters in the courtroom, 'I lost my cool today.'"
Monday, March 19, 2007
The Verdict: Where's The Juror, and How's The Jury?
This episode started and stopped with discussion of Mrs. Black's intemperate, perhaps injudicious, remarks. On the beginning of the show was Joanna Walters, an eyewitness to those remarks. The "slut" comment was made (in her words) in a "cut-glass,” “aggressive” voice, and she said that she had never heard such a thing during any trial she has covered. She also said that the remark was unprovoked by the journalist, CBC producer Melanie Glanz.
Next, Steve Skurka weighed in with the opinion that if the defense can show complicity with respect to the timing of the settlement, they're a long way towards getting an acquittal. A later guest, William (Bill) Mateja, opined that the timing was surprising, but the SEC is an independent agency that often goes its own way.
Jury consultant Samuel Solomon was next, discussing the reason for juror anonymity. There is a ”general concern” that the press will bend the trial out of shape. Ms. Todd broached the possibility of the court being embarrassed, and brought up two jurors who turned out to be convicted felons in another, recent, trial. Csr. Solomon, though, stated that the reason why Judge St. Eve has kept the jury anonymous is her general concern over a mistrial, or over possible appeals. Juror anonymity is not unprecedented during a racketeering trial, Ms. Todd noted, but juror safety is not relevant here, Csr. Soloman replied; a potential media circus is. Also, there's a general decorum-of-the-court issue at stake.
The children of Conrad Black, primarily Alana, got a moment. Siri Agrell, a former fellow intern, called Alana “gorgeous” and “unassuming,” as well as low-profile by habit; so are her brothers. She's low-key, and always smiling. She talks with Mrs. Black at the trial. According to journalist Ian Brown, she has a good relationship with her father: she gives him “vigour” and calms him down. He was unable to predict the effect on the jury of this close relationship; perhaps there will be none. Jeffrey Cramer’s two kids were there too. Mr. Greenspan’s daughter is working with him. The overall effect of the kids showing up is a humanization of the trial. Another journalist, Romina Maurino, noted that it's a tense time for Alana.
Two lawyers, Bill Mateja and Todd White, discussed the future of the trial. Csr. Mateja mentioned that the weekend announcement gave the defense an opportunity, and that the timing of the second settlement was rather odd. Nevertheless, it may not discredit Mr. Radler's testimony; the request for a halt was a defensive move by the defense. Anyway, the most recent Radler settlement was only a side deal; the primary deal the defense must discredit is the deal with the prosecution itself. Csr. White agreed, and added that Eddie Greenspan will take the delay in stride. He called the timing of the settlement announcement “too cute by half,” and blamed Mr. Radler for it. It is normal to stay SEC and civil matters until the associated trial is over. The delay may discredit, somewhat, Mr. Radler’s testimony. Csr. White noted, though, that the judge did refuse to adjourn simply on the basis of defense need to read the settlement papers.
Next were two other journalists, primarily discussing the pressures of journalism. David Litterick of the Telegraph, after disclosing that he was not sure what had happened to the missing juror, speculated that the juror in question could be compromised by reading of the settlement. He further disclosed that he’s pressured due to the time zone difference between Chicago and the U.K. He also brought up Mrs. Black being pushed by a journalist earlier, but Ms. Todd assumed that it was accidental. He thought Judge St. Eve was very impressive, and friendly. Janet Whitman said that Mrs. Black was under a lot of pressure. There has been a reporter throng building; some of them, including she herself, were looking for a human-interest story that could only be found through informal encounters. Reporters, though, are under pressure too.
The show ended with an editorial by Ms. Todd, called her "Closing Argument," about Mrs. Black's vulgarity: in her defense, she did seem fragile at times last week, but her experience as a journalist, as well as her husband's long career as a media proprietor, should have been enough for her to understand how journalism works.
Next, Steve Skurka weighed in with the opinion that if the defense can show complicity with respect to the timing of the settlement, they're a long way towards getting an acquittal. A later guest, William (Bill) Mateja, opined that the timing was surprising, but the SEC is an independent agency that often goes its own way.
Jury consultant Samuel Solomon was next, discussing the reason for juror anonymity. There is a ”general concern” that the press will bend the trial out of shape. Ms. Todd broached the possibility of the court being embarrassed, and brought up two jurors who turned out to be convicted felons in another, recent, trial. Csr. Solomon, though, stated that the reason why Judge St. Eve has kept the jury anonymous is her general concern over a mistrial, or over possible appeals. Juror anonymity is not unprecedented during a racketeering trial, Ms. Todd noted, but juror safety is not relevant here, Csr. Soloman replied; a potential media circus is. Also, there's a general decorum-of-the-court issue at stake.
The children of Conrad Black, primarily Alana, got a moment. Siri Agrell, a former fellow intern, called Alana “gorgeous” and “unassuming,” as well as low-profile by habit; so are her brothers. She's low-key, and always smiling. She talks with Mrs. Black at the trial. According to journalist Ian Brown, she has a good relationship with her father: she gives him “vigour” and calms him down. He was unable to predict the effect on the jury of this close relationship; perhaps there will be none. Jeffrey Cramer’s two kids were there too. Mr. Greenspan’s daughter is working with him. The overall effect of the kids showing up is a humanization of the trial. Another journalist, Romina Maurino, noted that it's a tense time for Alana.
Two lawyers, Bill Mateja and Todd White, discussed the future of the trial. Csr. Mateja mentioned that the weekend announcement gave the defense an opportunity, and that the timing of the second settlement was rather odd. Nevertheless, it may not discredit Mr. Radler's testimony; the request for a halt was a defensive move by the defense. Anyway, the most recent Radler settlement was only a side deal; the primary deal the defense must discredit is the deal with the prosecution itself. Csr. White agreed, and added that Eddie Greenspan will take the delay in stride. He called the timing of the settlement announcement “too cute by half,” and blamed Mr. Radler for it. It is normal to stay SEC and civil matters until the associated trial is over. The delay may discredit, somewhat, Mr. Radler’s testimony. Csr. White noted, though, that the judge did refuse to adjourn simply on the basis of defense need to read the settlement papers.
Next were two other journalists, primarily discussing the pressures of journalism. David Litterick of the Telegraph, after disclosing that he was not sure what had happened to the missing juror, speculated that the juror in question could be compromised by reading of the settlement. He further disclosed that he’s pressured due to the time zone difference between Chicago and the U.K. He also brought up Mrs. Black being pushed by a journalist earlier, but Ms. Todd assumed that it was accidental. He thought Judge St. Eve was very impressive, and friendly. Janet Whitman said that Mrs. Black was under a lot of pressure. There has been a reporter throng building; some of them, including she herself, were looking for a human-interest story that could only be found through informal encounters. Reporters, though, are under pressure too.
The show ended with an editorial by Ms. Todd, called her "Closing Argument," about Mrs. Black's vulgarity: in her defense, she did seem fragile at times last week, but her experience as a journalist, as well as her husband's long career as a media proprietor, should have been enough for her to understand how journalism works.
CTV's Steve Skurka's Take
CTV legal expert Steve Skurka offered his forecasts on the opening statements, and the trial itself, on CTV NewsNet just now. Here's his take: Graphs, charts, etc. are going to be used liberally in the trial. You can expect some drama in both opening statements...relative to the amount in Canadian opening statements. (Admittedly, this is somewhat of a low baseline.) David Radler's role, for the prosecution, is to fill in the circumstantial evidence in its case. Thus, he is a key witness for defense cross-examination.
Csr. Skurka also noted that the media only rates folding chairs. (Not even students' desks.)
[UPDATE: Skurka has just disclosed that the trial has been adjourned for the day. This Chicago Tribune report explains why: "Attorneys said a member of the jury did not arrive in court Monday morning, and officials could not reach the person in time to get the juror to court for the delayed afternoon start."
[UPDATE 2: He no longer believes that the entire jury will be dismissed. I was wrong about a three-day time period being mandated for Judge St. Eve to rule on the Chicago Tribune motion to release the identities of the jury: correction, and credit due, are in this post.]
[Csr, Skurka has his own blog that covers the trial.]
Csr. Skurka also noted that the media only rates folding chairs. (Not even students' desks.)
[UPDATE: Skurka has just disclosed that the trial has been adjourned for the day. This Chicago Tribune report explains why: "Attorneys said a member of the jury did not arrive in court Monday morning, and officials could not reach the person in time to get the juror to court for the delayed afternoon start."
[UPDATE 2: He no longer believes that the entire jury will be dismissed. I was wrong about a three-day time period being mandated for Judge St. Eve to rule on the Chicago Tribune motion to release the identities of the jury: correction, and credit due, are in this post.]
[Csr, Skurka has his own blog that covers the trial.]
BNN's Report On The Jury Freeze
From the latest report by Amanda Lang, in BNN's "Lunch Money" (12-12:30): One of Edward Genson's arguments in his pre-trial motion related to the fact that the defense couldn’t subpoena the settlement documents, but the prosecution offered to get them today. Gordon Paris, the first prosecution witness, was quoted in the press release announcing the settlement with the Sun-Times Media group. As a result of this, a juror might be dismissed, but his or her place will probably be filled with an alternate. Eric Sussman, the lead trial prosecutor, claimed ignorance of the settlement and the timing of it; and there's no suspicion otherwise. But, Ms. Lang asked, does SEC have a hidden agenda?
[BNN Update, On the 3 o'clock news report, Pat Bolland passed along a bit of frayed temper from Mrs. Black: she was heard to have called the jornalists covering the case "vermin," and one of them a "slut" - a female journalist. The Telegraph got her name, Melanie Glanz; according to The National's Havard Gould, she's actually a CBC producer.]
[BNN Update, On the 3 o'clock news report, Pat Bolland passed along a bit of frayed temper from Mrs. Black: she was heard to have called the jornalists covering the case "vermin," and one of them a "slut" - a female journalist. The Telegraph got her name, Melanie Glanz; according to The National's Havard Gould, she's actually a CBC producer.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)