The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have spread out in focus, ranging from boredom to poppies:
1. A report by Mary Vallis, webbed by the Montreal Gazette, is entitled "Legal boredom might be accused's salvation." The point behind this theory is that a complex case signifies the absense of any obvious guilt, and some cause for doubt. "Legal analysts say boredom and confusion could be important factors in the jury's decision. If anyone is hopelessly perplexed in the deliberation room, the jury may be reluctant to convict. Their confusion could in itself be reasonable doubt...."
2. Another report webbed by the Gazette has a list of the lawsuits in which Conrad Black is named as defendant, as well as ones he himself has launched. There's also a mention of two lawsuits already settled out of court.
3. Yesterday's refusal by Judge St. Eve to let the jury have a part of the court transcript made item #3 in the New York Post's "Business Briefs" column.
4. A feature webbed by the National Post has an explanation of what "tall poppy syndrome" refers to: cutting off the tallest bud in a poppy plant induces the plant to grow more buds.
5. A column by George Jonas, also webbed by the National Post, starts off by noting the clubbiness of the lawyers in the trial once the presentations are over. He pegs it as: "The system celebrates itself." Most of his column, though, is devoted to reporters' bias; he concludes that the most insidious form of bias comes from treating 'balance' as an end in itself: "The worst, most misleading copy comes from journalists who genuinely try to give balanced coverage to the proposition that the moon is made of green cheese." The rest of it compares the prosecution's case to a triple-decker sandwich with three kinds of bread.
6. Rosie DiManno's latest comment on the trial, webbed by the Toronto Star, focuses upon the waiting for the verdict. She's one of the few trial watchers who complains about the recent enforcement of the rely-on-notes-and-recollections instruction.
7. An festure by the Observer's Nick Cohen starts off by contrasing the present uncertainty with the supposed inevitability of a guilty verdict as of last March. He cites Paul Waldie as "one of few journalists from Black's home country who is not hopelessly biased for or against him," and relays Mr. Waldie's prediction that the only good-odds part of the prosecution's case was the evidence backing up the obstruction-of-justice charge; the others could go either way. Mr. Cohen ends with a contrast of America and the U.K.: the former has less class envy, while the latter has less juridicial vindictiveness. He concludes that the relatively lax corporate-fraud standards in the U.K. are proving to have been quite the competitive advantage, but one gained at the risk of an all-U.K. Enron scandal hitting the City.
----------
Conrad Black has been mentioned as soneone whose activities have given Canada somewhat of a bad name in a Sympatico/MSN column by Dierdre McMurdy, entitled "Feds shrug as Canadian icons sold off."
The trial makes up the middle third of a Scottish Sunday Herald column entitled "The Big Bad Wolf."
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Conrad Black Trivia, With A Presumption Of Irrelevance
Some people on the comeuppance side have been anticipating Conrad Black going to jail, and what life will be like for him there. The only ones I've seen tend to have a moralizing bent, but there are hints of a certain scurrility as based in jail lore. I haven't seen one that's explicit about it, but I have seen hints.
Actually, the odds that Conrad Black will do tough time, even if sentenced to enough years to rate medium security, are low. One reason for this improbability is his lifetime membership in the Privy Council of Canada.
This CanadaInfo article spells out the responsibilities of the Privy Council. These responsibilities have corresponding rights, which us regular folks in Canada don't have. One of them is the right to receive secret - classified - documents.
Try putting yourself in the shoes of the typical con. This old guy with a plump accent and a condescending manner is an immate in the jail you're currently staying in. He drones on about his responsibility to help the government of a country called 'Canada' and you don't know what to make of it. The guy looks, acts and talks rich, but you don't know if he's feeding everyone a story.
Then one day, he receives a visitor in the visiting room - an agent of some sort. The old droner now has in his hands a package from the "Government of Canada" that says it's full of classified documents. He asks for the warden to come down, and asks the warden to be placed in the hole so he can go through them. He also asks for a computer or portable typewriter so as to do his duty to the Queen. Despite the warden's glance that says 'someone's tin-cupping me here', the old droner gets all that he asks for...
Yep, if Conrad is sentenced to jail, he would do easy time. He need hardly drop the name of the CIA either.
[No-one's been fired from the PCO, and I don't even know if it's possible. Even if it was tried, Conrad could invoke his life peerage to get the Queen to block it.]
Actually, the odds that Conrad Black will do tough time, even if sentenced to enough years to rate medium security, are low. One reason for this improbability is his lifetime membership in the Privy Council of Canada.
This CanadaInfo article spells out the responsibilities of the Privy Council. These responsibilities have corresponding rights, which us regular folks in Canada don't have. One of them is the right to receive secret - classified - documents.
Try putting yourself in the shoes of the typical con. This old guy with a plump accent and a condescending manner is an immate in the jail you're currently staying in. He drones on about his responsibility to help the government of a country called 'Canada' and you don't know what to make of it. The guy looks, acts and talks rich, but you don't know if he's feeding everyone a story.
Then one day, he receives a visitor in the visiting room - an agent of some sort. The old droner now has in his hands a package from the "Government of Canada" that says it's full of classified documents. He asks for the warden to come down, and asks the warden to be placed in the hole so he can go through them. He also asks for a computer or portable typewriter so as to do his duty to the Queen. Despite the warden's glance that says 'someone's tin-cupping me here', the old droner gets all that he asks for...
Yep, if Conrad is sentenced to jail, he would do easy time. He need hardly drop the name of the CIA either.
[No-one's been fired from the PCO, and I don't even know if it's possible. Even if it was tried, Conrad could invoke his life peerage to get the Queen to block it.]
Friday, June 29, 2007
Media Roundup: Notes
The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have diminished in number once again, as there was little news from yesterday:
1. Peter Worthington's latest column, as webbed by the Calgary Sun, contains his call on the verdict: not guilty for Mark Kipnis, Peter Atkinson and Jack Boultbee. Conrad Black will either be acquitted or convicted on the obstruction-of-justice charge.
2. Paul Waldie's latest report, webbed by the Globe and Mail, contains two "Jury Updates" - specifically, a mention of two notes the jury sent out yesterday. It also mentions that Judge St. Eve has not released the names of the jurors yet. (Despite all the complaints that have surrounded this withholding, it may very well be standard procedure in trials where one of the charges is racketeering.)
3. Another report webbed by the Globe is a prison profile - a profile of the kind of jail Conrad Black may end up in if convicted. If he lands in medium security, according to Andrew Stoltmann, "I'll tell you something... A 63-year-old white man who at one point was very wealthy and tends to be a little bombastic and condescending is going to stand out like a sore thumb in a medium-security prison." The rest of the report discounts the possibility of it occurring. (This sore-thumb status could rate him the Paris Hilton sequestration treatment. In a way, it's ironic that certain prisoners are prominent enough to rate possible solitary confinement, but this implication makes for quite the means test.)
4. A brief report by Mary Vallis, webbed by the Montreal Gazette, describes the exhibit that the jurors asked for yesterday, and mentions the schedule note that they sent out earlier. The exhibit was a chart of the non-compete payments.
5. A report by Rick Westhead of the Toronto Star starts off by mention that Conrad Black is on record as spending more than $200,000 last month...not including legal fees. "While Black and others are accused of stealing $60 million (all figures U.S.) from Hollinger International Inc., lawyers working on Black's fraud case estimate legal fees related to the case eclipsed that figure months ago." After describing the two notes from the jury, it ends with the bill for Dennis Kozlowski: $17.8 million.
6. Michael Sneed's latest column, webbed by the Chicago Sun-Times, mentions a post-trial party thrown by Jack Boultbee's counsellor Patrick Tuite. Lawyers were invited; Judge St. Eve was not. Also mentioned near the end is Edward Genson's birthday, which arrives tomorrow.
7. A brief note saying that deliberations will continue today (9 AM to 1 PM CT,) before a brief recap of yesterday's, has been webbed by 680 News.
8. BNN reported, in its noon newscast, about a request note from the jury for a transcript of Jonathan Rosenberg's testimony. Csr. Rosenberg was a lawyer for the Special Committee of the Hollinger International Board of Directors. [His testimony under direct examination is in the middle of this report; under cross-examination, in the second half of this report.] The judge refused the request; the reason given was that the jurors were already told to rely upon their notes and recollections.
9. Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune also mentions the transcript request and refusal, and re-caps who Csr. Rosenberg had testified to (under direct examination.) Before it is a profile of the lawyer.
10. NBC5.com of Chicago has webbed an Associated Press feature report that focuses upon the heart of the charges: the non-compete agreements and payments. A noticable line in it: "It is virtually unheard of for [non-complete payments] to end up as the focus of a criminal trial."
11. A more immediate AP report, webbed by the International Herald Tribune, focuses on the same request and refusal. It too carries background about Csr. Rosenberg and his testimony. [An AP summary of this item, without the background, has been webbed by WQAD.com.]
12. A report by Mary Vallis and Theresa Tedesco, webbed by the Financial Post, notes that Csr. Rosenberg had testified that Peter Atkinson had said to him that his $2 million non-compete payment was a "'bonus that had been properly approved'" and "that CanWest Global Comunications had not requested that he sign a non-compete payment from him to close the deal."
13. Mr. Waldie appeared on BNN at 1:32 PM ET for an update. After reporting on the request and refusal, he passed along the reason why. The specific policy regarding the withholding of transcripts from juries "varies from judge to judge." In this case, the total-withhold option was chosen by Judge St. Eve because of the high number of sidebar conversations that are also in the transcript.
14. A report by Bloomberg's Andrew Harris and Joe Schneider, which covers the same subject, also has an excerpt from the cross-examination of Csr. Rosenberg. Also mentioned is that the refused request was one of four notes from the jury.
15. A Canadian Press wrapup report, webbed by CTV News. starts off by mentioning that the jury has gone home for the weekend without a verdict. It also notes that there have been two scheduling notes from the jury so far - one of them requesting a smoke break. (This last one was deemed to be not worthy of releasing the notifications today, despite any news value it might have had in these times.)
16. BNN aired a week's wrap–up discussion with Paul Waldie at 5:53 PM ET, as part of the show "Squeeze Play." (Mr. Waldie was co-host today.) After reviewing the deliberations so far, he explained that Csr. Rosenberg’s testimony had really hit at three defendants: Peter Atkinson, Jack Boultbee and Mark Kipnis; his testimony, which came right after David Radler's, also cast a shadow on the suspicious non-compete payments. The prosecution considered that testimony important enough to use it a major plank in their closing address. Csr. Rosenberg was also unruffled during cross-examination.
After finishing with the recount, Mr. Waldie made a revised call for the length of the deliberations: the verdict will probably come the week after next.
----------
A Bloomberg report contains the news that Richard Scrushy, the big one that got away, has been sentenced to about seven years for bribery.
Also, the transcript from the Q-and-A with Douglas Bell of the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog is available from here.
Finally, Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, was the first with the news about the smoke break; he had a little fun with the latter. More seriously, he advances the theory that a long sequestration period is good for the defense, because the prosecution's case is simple and the defense's is nuanced. The jury may be spending time verifying it, which presumably would be good for the defense because it implies doubts about the prosecution's narrative. (If true, then it's a point that I myself missed.)
1. Peter Worthington's latest column, as webbed by the Calgary Sun, contains his call on the verdict: not guilty for Mark Kipnis, Peter Atkinson and Jack Boultbee. Conrad Black will either be acquitted or convicted on the obstruction-of-justice charge.
2. Paul Waldie's latest report, webbed by the Globe and Mail, contains two "Jury Updates" - specifically, a mention of two notes the jury sent out yesterday. It also mentions that Judge St. Eve has not released the names of the jurors yet. (Despite all the complaints that have surrounded this withholding, it may very well be standard procedure in trials where one of the charges is racketeering.)
3. Another report webbed by the Globe is a prison profile - a profile of the kind of jail Conrad Black may end up in if convicted. If he lands in medium security, according to Andrew Stoltmann, "I'll tell you something... A 63-year-old white man who at one point was very wealthy and tends to be a little bombastic and condescending is going to stand out like a sore thumb in a medium-security prison." The rest of the report discounts the possibility of it occurring. (This sore-thumb status could rate him the Paris Hilton sequestration treatment. In a way, it's ironic that certain prisoners are prominent enough to rate possible solitary confinement, but this implication makes for quite the means test.)
4. A brief report by Mary Vallis, webbed by the Montreal Gazette, describes the exhibit that the jurors asked for yesterday, and mentions the schedule note that they sent out earlier. The exhibit was a chart of the non-compete payments.
5. A report by Rick Westhead of the Toronto Star starts off by mention that Conrad Black is on record as spending more than $200,000 last month...not including legal fees. "While Black and others are accused of stealing $60 million (all figures U.S.) from Hollinger International Inc., lawyers working on Black's fraud case estimate legal fees related to the case eclipsed that figure months ago." After describing the two notes from the jury, it ends with the bill for Dennis Kozlowski: $17.8 million.
6. Michael Sneed's latest column, webbed by the Chicago Sun-Times, mentions a post-trial party thrown by Jack Boultbee's counsellor Patrick Tuite. Lawyers were invited; Judge St. Eve was not. Also mentioned near the end is Edward Genson's birthday, which arrives tomorrow.
7. A brief note saying that deliberations will continue today (9 AM to 1 PM CT,) before a brief recap of yesterday's, has been webbed by 680 News.
8. BNN reported, in its noon newscast, about a request note from the jury for a transcript of Jonathan Rosenberg's testimony. Csr. Rosenberg was a lawyer for the Special Committee of the Hollinger International Board of Directors. [His testimony under direct examination is in the middle of this report; under cross-examination, in the second half of this report.] The judge refused the request; the reason given was that the jurors were already told to rely upon their notes and recollections.
9. Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune also mentions the transcript request and refusal, and re-caps who Csr. Rosenberg had testified to (under direct examination.) Before it is a profile of the lawyer.
10. NBC5.com of Chicago has webbed an Associated Press feature report that focuses upon the heart of the charges: the non-compete agreements and payments. A noticable line in it: "It is virtually unheard of for [non-complete payments] to end up as the focus of a criminal trial."
11. A more immediate AP report, webbed by the International Herald Tribune, focuses on the same request and refusal. It too carries background about Csr. Rosenberg and his testimony. [An AP summary of this item, without the background, has been webbed by WQAD.com.]
12. A report by Mary Vallis and Theresa Tedesco, webbed by the Financial Post, notes that Csr. Rosenberg had testified that Peter Atkinson had said to him that his $2 million non-compete payment was a "'bonus that had been properly approved'" and "that CanWest Global Comunications had not requested that he sign a non-compete payment from him to close the deal."
13. Mr. Waldie appeared on BNN at 1:32 PM ET for an update. After reporting on the request and refusal, he passed along the reason why. The specific policy regarding the withholding of transcripts from juries "varies from judge to judge." In this case, the total-withhold option was chosen by Judge St. Eve because of the high number of sidebar conversations that are also in the transcript.
14. A report by Bloomberg's Andrew Harris and Joe Schneider, which covers the same subject, also has an excerpt from the cross-examination of Csr. Rosenberg. Also mentioned is that the refused request was one of four notes from the jury.
15. A Canadian Press wrapup report, webbed by CTV News. starts off by mentioning that the jury has gone home for the weekend without a verdict. It also notes that there have been two scheduling notes from the jury so far - one of them requesting a smoke break. (This last one was deemed to be not worthy of releasing the notifications today, despite any news value it might have had in these times.)
16. BNN aired a week's wrap–up discussion with Paul Waldie at 5:53 PM ET, as part of the show "Squeeze Play." (Mr. Waldie was co-host today.) After reviewing the deliberations so far, he explained that Csr. Rosenberg’s testimony had really hit at three defendants: Peter Atkinson, Jack Boultbee and Mark Kipnis; his testimony, which came right after David Radler's, also cast a shadow on the suspicious non-compete payments. The prosecution considered that testimony important enough to use it a major plank in their closing address. Csr. Rosenberg was also unruffled during cross-examination.
After finishing with the recount, Mr. Waldie made a revised call for the length of the deliberations: the verdict will probably come the week after next.
----------
A Bloomberg report contains the news that Richard Scrushy, the big one that got away, has been sentenced to about seven years for bribery.
Also, the transcript from the Q-and-A with Douglas Bell of the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog is available from here.
Finally, Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, was the first with the news about the smoke break; he had a little fun with the latter. More seriously, he advances the theory that a long sequestration period is good for the defense, because the prosecution's case is simple and the defense's is nuanced. The jury may be spending time verifying it, which presumably would be good for the defense because it implies doubts about the prosecution's narrative. (If true, then it's a point that I myself missed.)
Thursday, June 28, 2007
The Verdict: The Juridicial Jury
Tonight's episode of The Verdict had two segments on the jury's first full day of deliberations, one at the beginning and the other near the end of this episode. The first segment was comprised of a report on the two notes sent out by the jury today and an interview with a former jury foreman. The reporter was David Akin, and the former foreman was Oscar Criner, foreman of the Arthur Anderson criminal trial. [Note: the 2002 conviction was overturned in 2005 by the Supreme Court]:
Mr. Akin started by reporting on the first note sent by the jury to the judge; at the time of notification, it had gotten the media excited. The second note was a request for the prosecution exhibit that tracks the non-compete payments. In retrospect, it could be seen that the first note was a false alarm; it was still the post-trial excitement that had kicked in. He also said that, because of a couple of journalists’ complaints, there will be no more advance notifications to the media.
Ms. Todd noted that the courtroom hasn't been very accomodative to the media. Mr. Akin said that Judge St. Eve herself has set the example. She’s not exactly pro-media. He relayed that that she had said to a Bloomberg reporter during an earlier trial that it was a privilege for the media to be in the courtroom, not a right. (Shades of driving in Ontario, I myself relate.)
Mr. Criner, the foreman of Anderson criminal trial jury, said that the responsibility of jury duty was "palpable.” He also said that a jury needs to plan in order to get through the evidence - specifically, he suggested a timeline to get organized. Ms. Todd noted that the Enron jury took a day, and he replied that their minds were largely made up. After making his point, he said that “presentations” help in understanding the evidence. He also disclosed that the guilty verdict was delivered after the judge sent them back during a continuing deadlock, while saying that the jury was the best the case would ever get. He emphasized that he and the other jurors took their responsibility very seriously.
Ms. Todd then asked him for his advice to the jury in the Conrad Black trial, and he recommended that they study the evidence “very carefully,” and that they remember the presumption of innocence.
The second segment on the deliberations opened with a filmed complaint made by Conrad Black about the media following him back to his hotel. The rest of it focused on the exhibit the jury had asked for. The guest was Hugh Totten.
Csr. Totten said that document was introduced in the near-beginning of the case. It was a table of each transaction and the amount of each non-compete payment, columned by name of recipient and rowed by transaction. He noted with interest that Mark Kipnis’ name wasn’t on it. He also said that the prosecution is likely “heartened” by the request for this document.
Ms. Todd replied that this request indicated that the jury was getting right at it. Csr. Totten replied that the jury was probably using it for organizational purposes. He refrained from forecasting whether or not the jury will ask for clarifications on points of law, and demurred from forecasting the length of the deliberations.
----------
Mark Steyn, in the Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has reported that the twelve jurors are now known. There are three men and nine women. "Some old favourites are there - the bubblegum blonde, the chronic sleeper, the middle-aged guy with the earring." He refrains from handicapping the verdict based on this new information.
In the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, there's an announcement of a live Q-and-A session on the trial, to start tomorrow at 12 noon ET. The general public is welcome to participate in it - provided that they register with TorontoLife.com before it starts off.
Mr. Akin started by reporting on the first note sent by the jury to the judge; at the time of notification, it had gotten the media excited. The second note was a request for the prosecution exhibit that tracks the non-compete payments. In retrospect, it could be seen that the first note was a false alarm; it was still the post-trial excitement that had kicked in. He also said that, because of a couple of journalists’ complaints, there will be no more advance notifications to the media.
Ms. Todd noted that the courtroom hasn't been very accomodative to the media. Mr. Akin said that Judge St. Eve herself has set the example. She’s not exactly pro-media. He relayed that that she had said to a Bloomberg reporter during an earlier trial that it was a privilege for the media to be in the courtroom, not a right. (Shades of driving in Ontario, I myself relate.)
Mr. Criner, the foreman of Anderson criminal trial jury, said that the responsibility of jury duty was "palpable.” He also said that a jury needs to plan in order to get through the evidence - specifically, he suggested a timeline to get organized. Ms. Todd noted that the Enron jury took a day, and he replied that their minds were largely made up. After making his point, he said that “presentations” help in understanding the evidence. He also disclosed that the guilty verdict was delivered after the judge sent them back during a continuing deadlock, while saying that the jury was the best the case would ever get. He emphasized that he and the other jurors took their responsibility very seriously.
Ms. Todd then asked him for his advice to the jury in the Conrad Black trial, and he recommended that they study the evidence “very carefully,” and that they remember the presumption of innocence.
The second segment on the deliberations opened with a filmed complaint made by Conrad Black about the media following him back to his hotel. The rest of it focused on the exhibit the jury had asked for. The guest was Hugh Totten.
Csr. Totten said that document was introduced in the near-beginning of the case. It was a table of each transaction and the amount of each non-compete payment, columned by name of recipient and rowed by transaction. He noted with interest that Mark Kipnis’ name wasn’t on it. He also said that the prosecution is likely “heartened” by the request for this document.
Ms. Todd replied that this request indicated that the jury was getting right at it. Csr. Totten replied that the jury was probably using it for organizational purposes. He refrained from forecasting whether or not the jury will ask for clarifications on points of law, and demurred from forecasting the length of the deliberations.
----------
Mark Steyn, in the Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has reported that the twelve jurors are now known. There are three men and nine women. "Some old favourites are there - the bubblegum blonde, the chronic sleeper, the middle-aged guy with the earring." He refrains from handicapping the verdict based on this new information.
In the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, there's an announcement of a live Q-and-A session on the trial, to start tomorrow at 12 noon ET. The general public is welcome to participate in it - provided that they register with TorontoLife.com before it starts off.
Another blog I'm running
Now that things are slowing down on the Conrad Black trial front, I've started another blog, called "Watching The Trade Go By." Instead of keeping my large nose stuck to the grindstone, I've allowed myself the luxury of commenting on the reports I've webbed to.
Also, in the midst of some slow time, I put together an effectively one-shot blog, on the music of Jake Holmes. I have to disclose that it's a plug blog, but I found myself in the position of plugging something that I found and liked. Jake Holmes is the folk singer who wrote and performed the original version of "Dazed and Confused."
In addition, I've decided to take the publicly-offered advice of Eddie Greenspan and curl up with a good book. I'll be blabbing about it soon.
Also, in the midst of some slow time, I put together an effectively one-shot blog, on the music of Jake Holmes. I have to disclose that it's a plug blog, but I found myself in the position of plugging something that I found and liked. Jake Holmes is the folk singer who wrote and performed the original version of "Dazed and Confused."
In addition, I've decided to take the publicly-offered advice of Eddie Greenspan and curl up with a good book. I'll be blabbing about it soon.
Media Roundup: Deliberating
The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial are concentrating on what is likely to be the last news event before the verdict is rendered - the start of jury deliberations:
1. NewsMax.com has webbed a version of the Reuters report on yesterday's trial events. It covers the deliberations, the instructions and the final part of the prosecutorial rebuttal. [An abbreviated version of this report has been webbed by the Los Angeles Times.]
2. A report by Eric Ferkenhoff of the New York Times notes that the jury has deliberated for about two-and-a-half hours, before it recaps the case.
3. The Amherst Daily News has webbed Romina Maurino's latest report, which concentrates on the deliberations and the instructions that the jury must now follow. A lengthy quote from Eddie Greenspan is in its middle; near its end, there's a brief recap of Eric Sussman's prosecutorial rebuttal.
4. The Houston Chronicle's list of business stories "Around The Nation" has the wind-up of the trial as its first item.
5. The Salt Lake Tribune has webbed the Associated Press report, written by Dave Carpenter, on the start of deliberations. It notes the centrality of David Radler's testimony to the outcome.
6. Canada East has webbed a what-to-expect report that says the jury deliberations are to continue today.
7. Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune has written a report that stresses the complexity of the case, and the "unenviable" task the jury faces, largely because of the document-centered nature of the case and the huge amount of documents in it.
8. Peter Worthington's latest column, as webbed by the Ottawa Sun, begins by concurring that the outcome is impossible to forecast. He goes out of his way to mention that Csr. Sussman, in yesterday's part of the rebuttal, focused almost excessively on Mark Kipnis; he compared it to a "filibuster." Mr. Worthington also notes that "[t]here's lots of obtuse language in the judge's instructions, which is guaranteed to confuse some of those on the jury if they actually attempt to read and understand them."
9. A mention of the trial is item #4 in the Boston Globe's "Business Notebook." It's entitled "Near the end."
10. Janet Whitman's report on the start of deliberations for the New York Post is sub-titled "Black Legal Team Counts On The 'Can't Win 'Em All' Theory." She handicaps the length of deliberations by noting that "legal experts said they would be surprised if the jury's deliberations wrap up in less than a week or two."
11. The Toronto Star's Rosie DiManno is still on the trial beat. The bulk of her latest column imputes nervousness, and even a sense of helplessness, to Conrad Black.
12. The first part of Paul Waldie's latest report, webbed by the Globe and Mail, focuses on yesterday's part of the rebuttal, noting that Csr. Sussman had also "quoted comments that three disgruntled Hollinger shareholders made during the company's annual meetings in 2002 and 2003." The second part focuses on Csr. Greenspan's reaction to the conclusion of the proceedings.
13. Another writer for the Canadian Press has written another report on the start of deliberations, as webbed by 680 News.
14. BNN aired an interview with Eddie Greenspan, conducted yesterday evening but broadcasted at about 11:08 AM ET today. He refused to rate this case with respect to all the others in which he's been a defense lawyer, but he did acknowledge “tremendous pressures” that were largely logistical. He also mentioned the paper blizzard of E-mails, which had added considerably to the document count. Csr. Greenspan has continued to decline to comment on case specifics, but he did say that Conrad Black maintains his innocence. He describes Conrad as an “excellent” client who trusts his lawyers. Regarding the possibility of a conviction for his client, he made an observation about miscarriages of justices before saying that Conrad Black is “highly confident” about the outcome.
15. WQAD.com has webbed an AP summary on the deliberations so far. It mentions a note passed to Judge St. Eve informing her that they plan to sit all day today and from 9 AM to 1 PM CT tomorrow. (According to a BNN ndewscast, this note caused a bit of a false-alarm flurry.)
16. BNN had a brief interview with Amanda Lang, aired at 1:33 PM ET. She reported on an issue being hashed over in court proceedings today: forfeiture of Conrad Black's property as part of a fine if he's convicted. This may require a new jury instruction if jury has to be brought in to decide on it. She also said that there's thirty minutes' notice for a verdict, and fifteen minutes for any other notice, such as this forfeiture issue.
17. Ms. Lang and Kevin O'Leary had a discussion on the deliberations for the BNN show "Squeeze Play" at about 5:25 PM ET. She started off by stating that jurors' notes can be telling about jury mindset, citing a question from the Scooter Libby trial deliberations where they asked if it would be possible for one person to forget what everyone else remembered. The only two that have been sent to the judge in the Conrad Black trial were about the scheduling and a request for a piece of evidence that should have been in the jury room. She didn't specify what piece.
Mr. O’Leary said that he expects deliberations to take place over a long time, with Conrad acquitted on all or most of the charges against him. He then asked Ms. Lang if there were any reporters still waiting for the verdict, and she replied that there are about 24 of them: Brits, locals, and Canadians. The number may dwindle.
Her call on the length of deliberations is 2-3 weeks, because there are lots of procedural duties that the jury has to follow. The discussion ended with a note of all the civil actions that Conrad Black will be involved in if acquitted, implying that he's not out of the legal woods even if he walks.
18. That requested exhibit is mentioned in a new report by Ms. Maurino, as webbed by 680 News. "What the jury asked for was a breakdown of disputed non-compete payments made to Black, the other defendants and prosecution witness David Radler." In contradistinction to the momentary media excitement, the lawyers are used to being summoned to court for answering juror questions; the report quotes Csr. Greenspan to that effect. Before going into depth on the deliberation process itself, including quotes from two experts, the report quotes Conrad Black about the second summons: "'It's really exciting, the jury wants an exhibit,' Black said sarcastically to a throng of reporters that followed him out."
19. A briefer report by Mary Vallis, as webbed by Canada.com, is more specific about the exhibit: "The jury in the fraud and racketeering trial of Conrad Black has asked to see a summary chart that the prosecution used to explain non-compete payments.... [It] contained a table illustrating the various newspaper transactions and related non-compete payments that are at the heart of the case against Black and his three co-defendants."
----------
Richard J. Finlay, in "Finlay ON Governance," has an assessment of the entire trial from a corporate-governance perspective, which starts off with this header: "Whatever else it may be, the Hollinger saga has been another valuable lesson in how not to run a company —and in what kind of company investors should avoid." From the perspective he uses, the story is long over, as Conrad Black has long been expunged from the CEOship of both Hollingers. The major operational weakness of Hollinger's corporate-governance structure was a too-accomodative board, which let the CEO get away with conduct that was (at the very least) irresponsible towards the shareholders. When this point is realized, the operations of Hollinger aren't that easy for others to distance themselves from except by cleaning up.
A more in-depth set of comments on the prosecutorial rebuttal has been made by Steve Skurka, who has written ten observations on it in his blog, "The Crime Sheet." He notes that Judge St. Eve had taken 57 minutes to read the jury instructions, and ends this latest entry with: "Conrad Black is a lucky man. His jury is concerned about getting it right and reaching a just verdict. The stakes are enormous. It will be the most important day of an illustrious life If Black is found guilty of a single charge, he will be led out of court in handcuffs and will be in custody until his sentencing. If there is an acquittal, there will be a fireworks display in honour of Canada Day. It will be sponsored by the Canadian libel bar."
1. NewsMax.com has webbed a version of the Reuters report on yesterday's trial events. It covers the deliberations, the instructions and the final part of the prosecutorial rebuttal. [An abbreviated version of this report has been webbed by the Los Angeles Times.]
2. A report by Eric Ferkenhoff of the New York Times notes that the jury has deliberated for about two-and-a-half hours, before it recaps the case.
3. The Amherst Daily News has webbed Romina Maurino's latest report, which concentrates on the deliberations and the instructions that the jury must now follow. A lengthy quote from Eddie Greenspan is in its middle; near its end, there's a brief recap of Eric Sussman's prosecutorial rebuttal.
4. The Houston Chronicle's list of business stories "Around The Nation" has the wind-up of the trial as its first item.
5. The Salt Lake Tribune has webbed the Associated Press report, written by Dave Carpenter, on the start of deliberations. It notes the centrality of David Radler's testimony to the outcome.
6. Canada East has webbed a what-to-expect report that says the jury deliberations are to continue today.
7. Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune has written a report that stresses the complexity of the case, and the "unenviable" task the jury faces, largely because of the document-centered nature of the case and the huge amount of documents in it.
8. Peter Worthington's latest column, as webbed by the Ottawa Sun, begins by concurring that the outcome is impossible to forecast. He goes out of his way to mention that Csr. Sussman, in yesterday's part of the rebuttal, focused almost excessively on Mark Kipnis; he compared it to a "filibuster." Mr. Worthington also notes that "[t]here's lots of obtuse language in the judge's instructions, which is guaranteed to confuse some of those on the jury if they actually attempt to read and understand them."
9. A mention of the trial is item #4 in the Boston Globe's "Business Notebook." It's entitled "Near the end."
10. Janet Whitman's report on the start of deliberations for the New York Post is sub-titled "Black Legal Team Counts On The 'Can't Win 'Em All' Theory." She handicaps the length of deliberations by noting that "legal experts said they would be surprised if the jury's deliberations wrap up in less than a week or two."
11. The Toronto Star's Rosie DiManno is still on the trial beat. The bulk of her latest column imputes nervousness, and even a sense of helplessness, to Conrad Black.
12. The first part of Paul Waldie's latest report, webbed by the Globe and Mail, focuses on yesterday's part of the rebuttal, noting that Csr. Sussman had also "quoted comments that three disgruntled Hollinger shareholders made during the company's annual meetings in 2002 and 2003." The second part focuses on Csr. Greenspan's reaction to the conclusion of the proceedings.
13. Another writer for the Canadian Press has written another report on the start of deliberations, as webbed by 680 News.
14. BNN aired an interview with Eddie Greenspan, conducted yesterday evening but broadcasted at about 11:08 AM ET today. He refused to rate this case with respect to all the others in which he's been a defense lawyer, but he did acknowledge “tremendous pressures” that were largely logistical. He also mentioned the paper blizzard of E-mails, which had added considerably to the document count. Csr. Greenspan has continued to decline to comment on case specifics, but he did say that Conrad Black maintains his innocence. He describes Conrad as an “excellent” client who trusts his lawyers. Regarding the possibility of a conviction for his client, he made an observation about miscarriages of justices before saying that Conrad Black is “highly confident” about the outcome.
15. WQAD.com has webbed an AP summary on the deliberations so far. It mentions a note passed to Judge St. Eve informing her that they plan to sit all day today and from 9 AM to 1 PM CT tomorrow. (According to a BNN ndewscast, this note caused a bit of a false-alarm flurry.)
16. BNN had a brief interview with Amanda Lang, aired at 1:33 PM ET. She reported on an issue being hashed over in court proceedings today: forfeiture of Conrad Black's property as part of a fine if he's convicted. This may require a new jury instruction if jury has to be brought in to decide on it. She also said that there's thirty minutes' notice for a verdict, and fifteen minutes for any other notice, such as this forfeiture issue.
17. Ms. Lang and Kevin O'Leary had a discussion on the deliberations for the BNN show "Squeeze Play" at about 5:25 PM ET. She started off by stating that jurors' notes can be telling about jury mindset, citing a question from the Scooter Libby trial deliberations where they asked if it would be possible for one person to forget what everyone else remembered. The only two that have been sent to the judge in the Conrad Black trial were about the scheduling and a request for a piece of evidence that should have been in the jury room. She didn't specify what piece.
Mr. O’Leary said that he expects deliberations to take place over a long time, with Conrad acquitted on all or most of the charges against him. He then asked Ms. Lang if there were any reporters still waiting for the verdict, and she replied that there are about 24 of them: Brits, locals, and Canadians. The number may dwindle.
Her call on the length of deliberations is 2-3 weeks, because there are lots of procedural duties that the jury has to follow. The discussion ended with a note of all the civil actions that Conrad Black will be involved in if acquitted, implying that he's not out of the legal woods even if he walks.
18. That requested exhibit is mentioned in a new report by Ms. Maurino, as webbed by 680 News. "What the jury asked for was a breakdown of disputed non-compete payments made to Black, the other defendants and prosecution witness David Radler." In contradistinction to the momentary media excitement, the lawyers are used to being summoned to court for answering juror questions; the report quotes Csr. Greenspan to that effect. Before going into depth on the deliberation process itself, including quotes from two experts, the report quotes Conrad Black about the second summons: "'It's really exciting, the jury wants an exhibit,' Black said sarcastically to a throng of reporters that followed him out."
19. A briefer report by Mary Vallis, as webbed by Canada.com, is more specific about the exhibit: "The jury in the fraud and racketeering trial of Conrad Black has asked to see a summary chart that the prosecution used to explain non-compete payments.... [It] contained a table illustrating the various newspaper transactions and related non-compete payments that are at the heart of the case against Black and his three co-defendants."
----------
Richard J. Finlay, in "Finlay ON Governance," has an assessment of the entire trial from a corporate-governance perspective, which starts off with this header: "Whatever else it may be, the Hollinger saga has been another valuable lesson in how not to run a company —and in what kind of company investors should avoid." From the perspective he uses, the story is long over, as Conrad Black has long been expunged from the CEOship of both Hollingers. The major operational weakness of Hollinger's corporate-governance structure was a too-accomodative board, which let the CEO get away with conduct that was (at the very least) irresponsible towards the shareholders. When this point is realized, the operations of Hollinger aren't that easy for others to distance themselves from except by cleaning up.
A more in-depth set of comments on the prosecutorial rebuttal has been made by Steve Skurka, who has written ten observations on it in his blog, "The Crime Sheet." He notes that Judge St. Eve had taken 57 minutes to read the jury instructions, and ends this latest entry with: "Conrad Black is a lucky man. His jury is concerned about getting it right and reaching a just verdict. The stakes are enormous. It will be the most important day of an illustrious life If Black is found guilty of a single charge, he will be led out of court in handcuffs and will be in custody until his sentencing. If there is an acquittal, there will be a fireworks display in honour of Canada Day. It will be sponsored by the Canadian libel bar."
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Late-Night Thought
Am I the only one who remembers the defendants' Rule 29 motions? Judge St. Eve seems to have put aside a decision on them.
It's highly probable that she has done so. A decision on them slipping entirely below the media radar isn't likely, because she had made a point of taking Mark Kipnis' seriously. This decision was newsworthy when she had announced that she would. Whatever her decision on all of them, the one for Mr. Kipnis would have made the news rounds as well. It looks to me like the motions have just slipped through the procedural cracks, and this elision may serve as grounds for appeal if Judge St. Eve is required to rule on them before the jury deliberates. She may not be.
At any rate, it's a dog that should have barked but hasn't yet. The verdict isn't the only loose end in the Conrad Black trial.
It's highly probable that she has done so. A decision on them slipping entirely below the media radar isn't likely, because she had made a point of taking Mark Kipnis' seriously. This decision was newsworthy when she had announced that she would. Whatever her decision on all of them, the one for Mr. Kipnis would have made the news rounds as well. It looks to me like the motions have just slipped through the procedural cracks, and this elision may serve as grounds for appeal if Judge St. Eve is required to rule on them before the jury deliberates. She may not be.
At any rate, it's a dog that should have barked but hasn't yet. The verdict isn't the only loose end in the Conrad Black trial.
CTV Nightly News' Take On the Deliberations
The lead report on the CTV News with Lloyd Robertson was about the end of the presentations of evidence and arguments in the trial itself. Conrad Black was “all smiles" when he left the courtroom today.
The reporter on this story, Lisa LaFlamme, started off with a recap and shifted to excerpts from an interview with Eddie Greenspan. During it, he noted that there have been juries who had smiled at him and convicted his client, and juries who refused to look at him and acquitted. He also said that this trial was unique, so prior probabilities aren’t that relevant.
If Conrad wins, then he walks. It’s all-but-impossible for the prosecution to appeal an acquittal.
All of the defendants, including Conrad Black, have been instructed to be at most fifteen minutes' travel time away from the courthouse. Ms. LaFlamme mentioned that the unanimity requirement may invite negotiations in the deliberation room. She ended her report by joking that Csr. Greenspan ‘hopes’ that the verdict doesn’t come down sixteen days hence, at it would fall on Friday the 13th.
[There's an associated CTV News webbed report too, with links to four video clips on the trial in the right column.]
The reporter on this story, Lisa LaFlamme, started off with a recap and shifted to excerpts from an interview with Eddie Greenspan. During it, he noted that there have been juries who had smiled at him and convicted his client, and juries who refused to look at him and acquitted. He also said that this trial was unique, so prior probabilities aren’t that relevant.
If Conrad wins, then he walks. It’s all-but-impossible for the prosecution to appeal an acquittal.
All of the defendants, including Conrad Black, have been instructed to be at most fifteen minutes' travel time away from the courthouse. Ms. LaFlamme mentioned that the unanimity requirement may invite negotiations in the deliberation room. She ended her report by joking that Csr. Greenspan ‘hopes’ that the verdict doesn’t come down sixteen days hence, at it would fall on Friday the 13th.
[There's an associated CTV News webbed report too, with links to four video clips on the trial in the right column.]
CBC "National" Report on the End Of The Presentations
The National's lead story was about the start of the juror deliberations in the Conrad Black trial. The correspondent behind it was Neil Macdonald. He reported that Conrad had little to say – just a short sentence in French about the charges being a pure fiction. His defense didn’t last long. Mr. Macdonald made a point about Judge St. Eve stressing that David Radler’s plea bargain should not be held against any of the defendants, and that his testimony should be assessed skeptically; in fact, there's an overall stress on common sense. Eddie Greenspan said on camera that he had no trepidation about Patrick J. Fitzgerald’s success ratio.
After the first half of the newscast was over, there was a feature comprised of a CBC interview with Csr. Greenspan, a recap of the charges by another CBC correspondent, Havard Gould, and an interview with trial-watcher Hugh Totten. In the interview with chief correspondent Peter Mansbridge, Csr. Greenspan said he can’t talk about the specifics of the trial. He also won’t say whether or not it’s been a fair trial at this time.
He believes that he got most of what he wanted to get across, if not everything due to rulings that went against him. He also affirmed that he won’t critique his own performance as of now. He did compliment Judge St. Eve for her handing of the case.
With regard to the supposed disguised apology for his earlier aggressiveness, he refused to categorize it as such. He normally does apologize outright to juries when he gets maladroit in court. He also demurred from an evaluation of the effect of Conrad’s out-of-trial comments: what's relevant is what the jury thinks. He also refused to make a prediction on the length of the deliberation, saying that the timeframes are impossible to predict.
After that interview was over, Havard Gould reported on the charges. Conrad Black faces a total of thirteen charges, at least one of which brings his lifestyle into focus. The details behind the lifestyle-related charges were sensational, but they’re not the heart of the prosecution's case. That heart is seven charges, dealing with six transactions. The prosecution alleges that the non-compete agreements were fraudulently misused, that they served as “cover stories” for misappropriation of funds. The defense says the non-compete agreements were “necessary” and were approved by the Audit Committee. If there’s anyone at fault, it’s David Radler. The defense for the obstruction-of-justice charge was that the 13 boxes contained personal items only, and that Conrad was never notified of the pending SEC action. Conrad Black has to beat all the charges; otherwise, he’ll do real time.
Once Mr. Gould's report was finished, there was an interview with Hugh Totten, again conducted by Mr. Mansbridge. Csr. Totten characterized the jury as anxious, as ready to get at it or get it over with. There was no key piece of evidence that will sway the outcome of the trial. Conrad's E-mails, though, did do real damage to his case, according to Csr. Totten. He pointed to the security-camera shot as a piece of living history, and he stuck to his earlier assessment that a rich man should not be hauling his own boxes on a holiday weekend. Csr. Totten the brought up the prosecution witnesses who were “crucified” through cross-examination. He now believes that there will be either conviction on the core charges or outright acquittal.
After the first half of the newscast was over, there was a feature comprised of a CBC interview with Csr. Greenspan, a recap of the charges by another CBC correspondent, Havard Gould, and an interview with trial-watcher Hugh Totten. In the interview with chief correspondent Peter Mansbridge, Csr. Greenspan said he can’t talk about the specifics of the trial. He also won’t say whether or not it’s been a fair trial at this time.
He believes that he got most of what he wanted to get across, if not everything due to rulings that went against him. He also affirmed that he won’t critique his own performance as of now. He did compliment Judge St. Eve for her handing of the case.
With regard to the supposed disguised apology for his earlier aggressiveness, he refused to categorize it as such. He normally does apologize outright to juries when he gets maladroit in court. He also demurred from an evaluation of the effect of Conrad’s out-of-trial comments: what's relevant is what the jury thinks. He also refused to make a prediction on the length of the deliberation, saying that the timeframes are impossible to predict.
After that interview was over, Havard Gould reported on the charges. Conrad Black faces a total of thirteen charges, at least one of which brings his lifestyle into focus. The details behind the lifestyle-related charges were sensational, but they’re not the heart of the prosecution's case. That heart is seven charges, dealing with six transactions. The prosecution alleges that the non-compete agreements were fraudulently misused, that they served as “cover stories” for misappropriation of funds. The defense says the non-compete agreements were “necessary” and were approved by the Audit Committee. If there’s anyone at fault, it’s David Radler. The defense for the obstruction-of-justice charge was that the 13 boxes contained personal items only, and that Conrad was never notified of the pending SEC action. Conrad Black has to beat all the charges; otherwise, he’ll do real time.
Once Mr. Gould's report was finished, there was an interview with Hugh Totten, again conducted by Mr. Mansbridge. Csr. Totten characterized the jury as anxious, as ready to get at it or get it over with. There was no key piece of evidence that will sway the outcome of the trial. Conrad's E-mails, though, did do real damage to his case, according to Csr. Totten. He pointed to the security-camera shot as a piece of living history, and he stuck to his earlier assessment that a rich man should not be hauling his own boxes on a holiday weekend. Csr. Totten the brought up the prosecution witnesses who were “crucified” through cross-examination. He now believes that there will be either conviction on the core charges or outright acquittal.
The Verdict: And Now, The Waiting
A little more than a third of tonight's episode of The Verdict was devoted to the wrap-up of the proceedings, and the likely state of mind of the jurors.
The first guest was Eddie Greenspan, who was interviewed by Ms. Todd. He described Conrad Black as “resolute” and “confident,” as well as engaged in the trial process. Barbara is “fine” and is holding up will under the pressure. He's withholding a self-assessment of performance until the case itself is over. He’ll speak about it then.
He did note, though, that Eric Sussman took 6 hrs and 15 min, and Julie Ruder went for 7 hours. He isn't too fond of the rebuttal system. As far as present concerns are concerned, though, he said (tongue-in-cheek) that he's concerned that the jury will deliberate “for three months.”
With regard to the obstruction of justice charge, he dismissed “armchair experts” who rate the charge as tough to beat. To him, it's a “simple” charge that never should have been laid. His comment on the ostrich instruction was that “willful blindness” is more restricted than journalists sometimes let on. Canada does have an analog, although it isn't much discussed.
When asked by Ms. Todd if Conrad Black will sue for wrongful prosecution if acquitted, he said that he didn't even know if doing so was possible under the American system, nor does he know how difficult it is to sue prosecutors. Conrad will, though, re-activate the defamation suits already launched against Richard Breeden, the authors of the Special Committee report, and those who wrote scurrilous books allegedly defaming Conrad Black.
He had no comment regarding the relevance of Canadian tax law to the case, saying that Judge St. Eve had settled the issue. He ended by saying that he plans to to relax in the interim period between now and the annoucement of the verdict.
After Csr. Greenspan was done with, the next guest was David Akin, the CTV reporter on the trial beat. After saying for some length that the jury's body language menat that they were raring to get at the deliberations, he did venture that Csr. Sussman did “drag it out a little long” He noted that a jury consultant told him that women tend to convict more reliably than men, and also said that it was likely that deliberations will contunue until after July 4. Conrad Black was “stone-faced” unless he was enjoying himself or was rankling under a direct attack. He did not have much rapport with the jury, and the same was true for the other defendants - unlike their lawyers.
The next two guests, brought on to speculate about the jury's deliberations, were jury consultant and lawyer Paul Lisnek, and former prosecutor Ted Chung. Csr. Lisnek began by saying that Conrad was remote largely because he was told to be that way. Defendants schmoozing juries usually end up weakening their defense.
Csr. Chung began by noting that a rebuttal, if used well, can salvage the case. He said that Csr. Sussman had made sure that he had said everything to the jury. Csr. Lisnek then spoke up by concluding that the rebuttal was probably too long, as such considerations tend to ignore juror patience level. A prosecutor should wind up when the jurors show restlessness. When he was presented by Ms. Todd with the alternate explanation – that the jurors just wanted to get to it – he replied that juries are quite unpredictable in terms of deliberation length, but the deliberation is likely to be too long to matter.
Csr. Chung picked up on this point by saying that the case will be complex for a jury to decide because there are four defendants and many charges. The time troubles will come from the need to organize themselves. A quick verdict will only come if they’re of one mind. The difference in defendants makes this single-mindedness unlikely. The jury may start with Mark Kipnis, because he’d be relatively easy to peg. After commenting that juries find it easy to account for plea bargains, he made this point regarding Mr. Kipnis: juries tend to work by negotiation and compromise. If the pro-conviction jurors agree to let Mr. Kipnis go, that agreeableness could make pro-acquittal juries agree to go hard on Conrad Black. (This point backs up an opinion that Ms. Todd has expressed on a few earlier shows.)
Csr. Chung finished by noting that the ostrich instruction suggests that jurors need not worry that much about defendants' state of mind; they can concentrate on actions to determine guilt.
The Conrad Black case made up the substance of Ms. Todd's "Closing Argument" editorial. She began by calling attention to the general relief that the 'trial' is over, which she found amusing. It's long from over - in fact, Ms. Todd believes that it'll never end. If there's conviction on even one count, an appeal will be forthoming almost instantaneously. If he's acquitted, Conrad will go out a'suing. Either way, the supposed finality will prove to be little more than an extended break.
The first guest was Eddie Greenspan, who was interviewed by Ms. Todd. He described Conrad Black as “resolute” and “confident,” as well as engaged in the trial process. Barbara is “fine” and is holding up will under the pressure. He's withholding a self-assessment of performance until the case itself is over. He’ll speak about it then.
He did note, though, that Eric Sussman took 6 hrs and 15 min, and Julie Ruder went for 7 hours. He isn't too fond of the rebuttal system. As far as present concerns are concerned, though, he said (tongue-in-cheek) that he's concerned that the jury will deliberate “for three months.”
With regard to the obstruction of justice charge, he dismissed “armchair experts” who rate the charge as tough to beat. To him, it's a “simple” charge that never should have been laid. His comment on the ostrich instruction was that “willful blindness” is more restricted than journalists sometimes let on. Canada does have an analog, although it isn't much discussed.
When asked by Ms. Todd if Conrad Black will sue for wrongful prosecution if acquitted, he said that he didn't even know if doing so was possible under the American system, nor does he know how difficult it is to sue prosecutors. Conrad will, though, re-activate the defamation suits already launched against Richard Breeden, the authors of the Special Committee report, and those who wrote scurrilous books allegedly defaming Conrad Black.
He had no comment regarding the relevance of Canadian tax law to the case, saying that Judge St. Eve had settled the issue. He ended by saying that he plans to to relax in the interim period between now and the annoucement of the verdict.
After Csr. Greenspan was done with, the next guest was David Akin, the CTV reporter on the trial beat. After saying for some length that the jury's body language menat that they were raring to get at the deliberations, he did venture that Csr. Sussman did “drag it out a little long” He noted that a jury consultant told him that women tend to convict more reliably than men, and also said that it was likely that deliberations will contunue until after July 4. Conrad Black was “stone-faced” unless he was enjoying himself or was rankling under a direct attack. He did not have much rapport with the jury, and the same was true for the other defendants - unlike their lawyers.
The next two guests, brought on to speculate about the jury's deliberations, were jury consultant and lawyer Paul Lisnek, and former prosecutor Ted Chung. Csr. Lisnek began by saying that Conrad was remote largely because he was told to be that way. Defendants schmoozing juries usually end up weakening their defense.
Csr. Chung began by noting that a rebuttal, if used well, can salvage the case. He said that Csr. Sussman had made sure that he had said everything to the jury. Csr. Lisnek then spoke up by concluding that the rebuttal was probably too long, as such considerations tend to ignore juror patience level. A prosecutor should wind up when the jurors show restlessness. When he was presented by Ms. Todd with the alternate explanation – that the jurors just wanted to get to it – he replied that juries are quite unpredictable in terms of deliberation length, but the deliberation is likely to be too long to matter.
Csr. Chung picked up on this point by saying that the case will be complex for a jury to decide because there are four defendants and many charges. The time troubles will come from the need to organize themselves. A quick verdict will only come if they’re of one mind. The difference in defendants makes this single-mindedness unlikely. The jury may start with Mark Kipnis, because he’d be relatively easy to peg. After commenting that juries find it easy to account for plea bargains, he made this point regarding Mr. Kipnis: juries tend to work by negotiation and compromise. If the pro-conviction jurors agree to let Mr. Kipnis go, that agreeableness could make pro-acquittal juries agree to go hard on Conrad Black. (This point backs up an opinion that Ms. Todd has expressed on a few earlier shows.)
Csr. Chung finished by noting that the ostrich instruction suggests that jurors need not worry that much about defendants' state of mind; they can concentrate on actions to determine guilt.
The Conrad Black case made up the substance of Ms. Todd's "Closing Argument" editorial. She began by calling attention to the general relief that the 'trial' is over, which she found amusing. It's long from over - in fact, Ms. Todd believes that it'll never end. If there's conviction on even one count, an appeal will be forthoming almost instantaneously. If he's acquitted, Conrad will go out a'suing. Either way, the supposed finality will prove to be little more than an extended break.
Wrapping It Up (Final Soliloquy)
CTV NewsNet aired a report from David Akin with the first details on the ending of Eric Sussman's closing address. For the first half-hour today, Csr. Sussman concentrated on Peter Atkinson. The defense is making objections repeatedly. Mr. Akin also reported that the jury instructions are going to take at least a couple of hours. Proceedings will end at 3 PM CT, because of a prior commitment a juror has.
Mark Steyn has reported that Csr. Sussman has said that "he'll be taking up the morning" with the rebuttal. Two later entries mention two verbal mannerisms the prosecutor is deploying. One he's already known for using, the other is new.
CBC Newsworld aired a report from Heather Hiscox at approximately 11:10 AM ET. In the latter part of it, she mentioned that Csr. Sussman is still going, and has asked for the entire morning to finish his rebuttal as Mr. Steyn had reported. Given that two hours will be needed to deliver the jury instructions, and the lunch break, the jury instructions are likely to be finished by that 3 PM constraint mentioned by Mr. Akin. (The first part was taken up by a review of the jury instructions.)
An excerpt of what Csr. Sussman had said about Mr. Atkinson is contained in a CP report webbed by 680 News: "Lead prosecutor Eric Sussman took them through several government arguments against Black co-defendant Peter Atkinson, saying he's not the 'open and honest' man the defence makes him out to be."
A more recent interview with Mr. Akin, aired by CTV NewsNet at 12:02 PM ET, had him reporting that Csr. Sussman is almost finished with his rebuttal. The jurors’ body language shows, according to Mr. Akin, that they’re ready to get right at the deliberations. The jurors will have access to all the evidence, but they must ask the judge questions in writing, and the judge must vet the lawyers before answering.
Conrad Black was there, stone-faced, and Mr. Atkinson’s face turned red at times. Mr. Akin also noted that, once a verdict is delivered, there will be 30 minutes’ notice given.
According to a BNN news bulletin, aired at 12:15 PM ET, Csr. Sussman has now finished his rebuttal. Mr. Steyn has reported that Csr. Sussman had been asked by Judge St. Eve if he was near to finishing, just before he finished.
An updated CP report, as webbed by 570 News, has some excerpts on the final part of Csr. Sussman's rebuttal, which pertain to what he said about Mr. Atkinson: "'He was not open and honest about the bonus money... Why did Peter Atkinson confess? Because with all the documents, all the witnesses - he knew the jig was up...." The report also described Conrad Black as looking "weary" as of earlier this morning.
Mr. Steyn has landed a scoop: after finishing his rebuttal, Csr. Sussman announced that the government is withdrawing one charge of tax fraud against Mr. Atkinson "in respect of Hollinger's 1999 tax return." CBC Newsworld has also announced that the judge's instructions have begun.
A Bloomberg report on the rebuttal has Csr. Sussman's final words "urging them to convict all four defendants... 'Justice demands it,' Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Sussman said. 'Return a verdict of guilty on all counts.' It also mentions he reprising a theme that he had included yesterday: the thirteen prosecution witness that, Sussman claimed, the defense impugned as liars. "'They want you to believe that all these witnesses lied,'' Sussman said. 'Because if that testimony stands, they are sunk.'" [An updated version of this same report has quotes from Eddie Greenspan about the trial now that it's in the hands of the jury. It also mentions the dropped tax-fraud charge against Mr. Atkinson, a few of the instructions, and spends some time on the pbstruction-of-justice charge.]
A new CP report, webbed by 680 News, has confirmed that the reading of the instructions has begun. It says that "[e]stimates on the length of deliberations range from a couple of days to more than three weeks."
A report from Paul Waldie, webbed by the Globe and Mail and containing some material from the Canadian Press, passes along some of the rhetorical techniques that Csr. Sussman had used today. "Mr. Sussman spent two hours this morning taking apart defence arguments. He said over and over that Lord Black and three other defendants stole money that belonged to shareholders of Hollinger international Inc." He also brought in the concept of "honest services," tying it in with the fact that there are few guarantees in the stock market. It also reports that Csr. Sussman "ended his remarks by showing jurors an e-mail Lord Black wrote in May 2002 that said, 'Two years from now no one will remember any of this.'"
Mr. Steyn has called attention to an instruction, read by Judge St. Eve, that other commentators haven't as of yet. It relates to the obstruction-of-justice charge: "To 'obstruct justice', you have to obstruct an 'official proceeding'. In her instructions to the jury, Judge St Eve told them that an 'internal corporate document retention policy' does not constitute an 'official proceeding'."
Amanda Lang, reporting on BNN at 1:54 PM ET, said that the instructions have taken away the vagueness surrounding the relevant legal terms. She also noted what the updated Bloomberg report had mentioned: the instructions have now been given. The three alternates have been dismissed, but have also been put “on call” in case one or more of the jurors has to withdraw. A later update, at 2:01 PM ET, said that the jury is now deliberating.
Andrew Stern of Reuters has a report out that also covers the beginning of the deliberations. He notes in it that "[t]here was no clue as to which way the jury was leaning after hearing from about 50 witnesses in a case involving complex business transactions that prosecutors say amounted to common thievery." The rest of the report recaps the end of the rebuttal and the dropping of one of the charges that Mr. Atkinson is facing.
A wrap-up of the entire day's events has been written by Andrew Clark and webbed by the Guardian. He mentions that all of Conrad Black's children were there, as well as Barbara Black and her ex-husband George Jonas. [An updated version has added a quote from Csr. Greenspan and mentions Patrick Fitzgerald's 90% conviction rate in federal criminal trials.]
WQAD.com has webbed a briefer one from the Associated Press, and the International Herald Tribune has webbed a slightly longer version of that AP summary. The last report says that the reading of the instructions had taken 48 minutes.
A much more extensive wrap-up, covering the entire trial, has been written by Theresa Tedesco and webbed by the Financial Post. Every major point in the trial is touched upon in it. She even worked in a few snippets from Mr. Black's notorious E-mails. Her report is part of a coverage extravaganza in the Post that includes a report by Mary Vallis on the day's events. The last mentions that "[i]n the final moments of the trial, Mr. Sussman presented the jury with two large, black placards that read 'honesty' and 'loyalty.'" (Thanks to an anonymous commenter who put me on to these.)
BNN aired a double interview with Amanda Lang and Paul Waldie at 5:13 PM ET, for the show “Squeeze Play.” Ms. Lang started off by recounting the day’s events. She highlighted one moment in the rebuttal: Csr. Sussman said that the case hinges upon the government’s credibility, which struck Ms. Lang as powerful and even effective. Mr. Waldie thought that the prosecution’s distancing its case from David Radler was “telling.” He was supposed to be the prosecution’s prime witness.
Kevin O’Leary then asked about gender influence on the jury. Ms. Lang replied that it might not have any, despite expert opinion to the contrary. Interestingly enough, she noted, the jury has formed into “cliques.” The four men have been attentive. There's no sense of how long the jury will be deliberating.
An interview clip, with Csr. Greenspan answering after being asked what he would have done differently, was aired. He didn’t answer except for generalities. Mr. Waldie, commenting on his performance, said that Csr. Greenspan had real trouble with procedural rules at first, and he was more confrontational than other defense lawyers, but his close was effective. Bringing him in was a risky play that, according to Mr. Waldie, paid off.
There will be 30 minutes’ notice, but only lawyers can be admitted to the building after 6 PM. But, it’s unlikely that jury will stay long after hours because the air conditioning is turned off at 5 PM.
To get back to other wrap-up reports, AHN has webbed a summary that sketches out what the jury will be deliberating on. James Bone of the Times Online is one of the few reporters to stick his neck out in terms of time. His report is entitled "Restless jury could reach quick verdict in trial of Lord Black" and cites the eagerness of the jury to get on with the proceedings, as well as a once-expressed desire to stay late, as evidence for his call. The bulk of his report meshes highlights from Csr. Sussman's rebuttal with the judge's instructions.
Ms. Maurino's latest report, as webbed by 1130 News, relates the emphasis that Judge St. Eve had put in her instructions upon considering each charge separately. She notes that this emphasis may lengthen the deliberation process considerably, as there are a total of 43 charges to consider. The report also contains an extensive quote from Csr. Greenspan after deliberations began: "[He] said he was impressed with the jury's diligence, saying they had 'paid a lot of attention' even when the trial was 'majorly boring.'... Black and his family 'were holding up exceptionally well... This has been a very tense and very nerve-racking trial... We're not at home, we're here in Chicago, so none of us are living in our homes... for four months and every morning is getting up to get to court at 8:30 in the morning and stay 'til five and that's our life.'" [A version webbed by 570 News has two fact sheets at its end, one about the defendants and the other about the trial itself.]
A brief quote from Csr. Greenspan is near the end of a more extensive AP report, as webbed by MSN Money. After mentioning that the jury is now deliberating, it says: "The deliberations cap a trial that probed both the complex and the sensational. Its focus ranged from a blow-by-blow of Hollinger's newspaper transactions to the high-flying lifestyle of the aristocratic Black and whether he siphoned corporate money to pay for a vacation in Bora Bora, a surprise birthday party for his wife and apartments on Park Avenue in New York." Also mentioned is the claim by Eric Sussman, during the rebuttal, that a "'false pretense [that exists in this case] is that [a non-compete payments to the defendants is] non-compete money," Sussman said. 'It's really a bonus.'" WQAD.com has also webbed an AP fact sheet on the entire trial.
----------
A "Media Scout" report in Maisonneuve points out that the National Post print edition has devoted the first eleven pages to coverage of the Conrad Black trial and claims that most of it is slanted. The author, Daniel Tencer, also claims that Rosie DiManno's latest is slanted the other way.
More trial-centered is Matthew McClearn's review of the first part of Csr. Sussman's rebuttal in the Canadian Business Black trial blog. The beginning of it telegraphs the rest: "The prosecution’s rebuttal is, as one defence lawyer recently put it, 'a potent weapon.'... The lead prosecutor in the USA vs. Conrad Black et al trial in Chicago, Eric Sussman, did not make the most of this advantage. Even potent weapons need to be properly aimed to achieve maximum effect...."
Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, uses some colourful expressions to describe the media coverage of the trial's end and the deliberation's beginning.
Mark Steyn has reported that Csr. Sussman has said that "he'll be taking up the morning" with the rebuttal. Two later entries mention two verbal mannerisms the prosecutor is deploying. One he's already known for using, the other is new.
CBC Newsworld aired a report from Heather Hiscox at approximately 11:10 AM ET. In the latter part of it, she mentioned that Csr. Sussman is still going, and has asked for the entire morning to finish his rebuttal as Mr. Steyn had reported. Given that two hours will be needed to deliver the jury instructions, and the lunch break, the jury instructions are likely to be finished by that 3 PM constraint mentioned by Mr. Akin. (The first part was taken up by a review of the jury instructions.)
An excerpt of what Csr. Sussman had said about Mr. Atkinson is contained in a CP report webbed by 680 News: "Lead prosecutor Eric Sussman took them through several government arguments against Black co-defendant Peter Atkinson, saying he's not the 'open and honest' man the defence makes him out to be."
A more recent interview with Mr. Akin, aired by CTV NewsNet at 12:02 PM ET, had him reporting that Csr. Sussman is almost finished with his rebuttal. The jurors’ body language shows, according to Mr. Akin, that they’re ready to get right at the deliberations. The jurors will have access to all the evidence, but they must ask the judge questions in writing, and the judge must vet the lawyers before answering.
Conrad Black was there, stone-faced, and Mr. Atkinson’s face turned red at times. Mr. Akin also noted that, once a verdict is delivered, there will be 30 minutes’ notice given.
According to a BNN news bulletin, aired at 12:15 PM ET, Csr. Sussman has now finished his rebuttal. Mr. Steyn has reported that Csr. Sussman had been asked by Judge St. Eve if he was near to finishing, just before he finished.
An updated CP report, as webbed by 570 News, has some excerpts on the final part of Csr. Sussman's rebuttal, which pertain to what he said about Mr. Atkinson: "'He was not open and honest about the bonus money... Why did Peter Atkinson confess? Because with all the documents, all the witnesses - he knew the jig was up...." The report also described Conrad Black as looking "weary" as of earlier this morning.
Mr. Steyn has landed a scoop: after finishing his rebuttal, Csr. Sussman announced that the government is withdrawing one charge of tax fraud against Mr. Atkinson "in respect of Hollinger's 1999 tax return." CBC Newsworld has also announced that the judge's instructions have begun.
A Bloomberg report on the rebuttal has Csr. Sussman's final words "urging them to convict all four defendants... 'Justice demands it,' Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Sussman said. 'Return a verdict of guilty on all counts.' It also mentions he reprising a theme that he had included yesterday: the thirteen prosecution witness that, Sussman claimed, the defense impugned as liars. "'They want you to believe that all these witnesses lied,'' Sussman said. 'Because if that testimony stands, they are sunk.'" [An updated version of this same report has quotes from Eddie Greenspan about the trial now that it's in the hands of the jury. It also mentions the dropped tax-fraud charge against Mr. Atkinson, a few of the instructions, and spends some time on the pbstruction-of-justice charge.]
A new CP report, webbed by 680 News, has confirmed that the reading of the instructions has begun. It says that "[e]stimates on the length of deliberations range from a couple of days to more than three weeks."
A report from Paul Waldie, webbed by the Globe and Mail and containing some material from the Canadian Press, passes along some of the rhetorical techniques that Csr. Sussman had used today. "Mr. Sussman spent two hours this morning taking apart defence arguments. He said over and over that Lord Black and three other defendants stole money that belonged to shareholders of Hollinger international Inc." He also brought in the concept of "honest services," tying it in with the fact that there are few guarantees in the stock market. It also reports that Csr. Sussman "ended his remarks by showing jurors an e-mail Lord Black wrote in May 2002 that said, 'Two years from now no one will remember any of this.'"
Mr. Steyn has called attention to an instruction, read by Judge St. Eve, that other commentators haven't as of yet. It relates to the obstruction-of-justice charge: "To 'obstruct justice', you have to obstruct an 'official proceeding'. In her instructions to the jury, Judge St Eve told them that an 'internal corporate document retention policy' does not constitute an 'official proceeding'."
Amanda Lang, reporting on BNN at 1:54 PM ET, said that the instructions have taken away the vagueness surrounding the relevant legal terms. She also noted what the updated Bloomberg report had mentioned: the instructions have now been given. The three alternates have been dismissed, but have also been put “on call” in case one or more of the jurors has to withdraw. A later update, at 2:01 PM ET, said that the jury is now deliberating.
Andrew Stern of Reuters has a report out that also covers the beginning of the deliberations. He notes in it that "[t]here was no clue as to which way the jury was leaning after hearing from about 50 witnesses in a case involving complex business transactions that prosecutors say amounted to common thievery." The rest of the report recaps the end of the rebuttal and the dropping of one of the charges that Mr. Atkinson is facing.
A wrap-up of the entire day's events has been written by Andrew Clark and webbed by the Guardian. He mentions that all of Conrad Black's children were there, as well as Barbara Black and her ex-husband George Jonas. [An updated version has added a quote from Csr. Greenspan and mentions Patrick Fitzgerald's 90% conviction rate in federal criminal trials.]
WQAD.com has webbed a briefer one from the Associated Press, and the International Herald Tribune has webbed a slightly longer version of that AP summary. The last report says that the reading of the instructions had taken 48 minutes.
A much more extensive wrap-up, covering the entire trial, has been written by Theresa Tedesco and webbed by the Financial Post. Every major point in the trial is touched upon in it. She even worked in a few snippets from Mr. Black's notorious E-mails. Her report is part of a coverage extravaganza in the Post that includes a report by Mary Vallis on the day's events. The last mentions that "[i]n the final moments of the trial, Mr. Sussman presented the jury with two large, black placards that read 'honesty' and 'loyalty.'" (Thanks to an anonymous commenter who put me on to these.)
BNN aired a double interview with Amanda Lang and Paul Waldie at 5:13 PM ET, for the show “Squeeze Play.” Ms. Lang started off by recounting the day’s events. She highlighted one moment in the rebuttal: Csr. Sussman said that the case hinges upon the government’s credibility, which struck Ms. Lang as powerful and even effective. Mr. Waldie thought that the prosecution’s distancing its case from David Radler was “telling.” He was supposed to be the prosecution’s prime witness.
Kevin O’Leary then asked about gender influence on the jury. Ms. Lang replied that it might not have any, despite expert opinion to the contrary. Interestingly enough, she noted, the jury has formed into “cliques.” The four men have been attentive. There's no sense of how long the jury will be deliberating.
An interview clip, with Csr. Greenspan answering after being asked what he would have done differently, was aired. He didn’t answer except for generalities. Mr. Waldie, commenting on his performance, said that Csr. Greenspan had real trouble with procedural rules at first, and he was more confrontational than other defense lawyers, but his close was effective. Bringing him in was a risky play that, according to Mr. Waldie, paid off.
There will be 30 minutes’ notice, but only lawyers can be admitted to the building after 6 PM. But, it’s unlikely that jury will stay long after hours because the air conditioning is turned off at 5 PM.
To get back to other wrap-up reports, AHN has webbed a summary that sketches out what the jury will be deliberating on. James Bone of the Times Online is one of the few reporters to stick his neck out in terms of time. His report is entitled "Restless jury could reach quick verdict in trial of Lord Black" and cites the eagerness of the jury to get on with the proceedings, as well as a once-expressed desire to stay late, as evidence for his call. The bulk of his report meshes highlights from Csr. Sussman's rebuttal with the judge's instructions.
Ms. Maurino's latest report, as webbed by 1130 News, relates the emphasis that Judge St. Eve had put in her instructions upon considering each charge separately. She notes that this emphasis may lengthen the deliberation process considerably, as there are a total of 43 charges to consider. The report also contains an extensive quote from Csr. Greenspan after deliberations began: "[He] said he was impressed with the jury's diligence, saying they had 'paid a lot of attention' even when the trial was 'majorly boring.'... Black and his family 'were holding up exceptionally well... This has been a very tense and very nerve-racking trial... We're not at home, we're here in Chicago, so none of us are living in our homes... for four months and every morning is getting up to get to court at 8:30 in the morning and stay 'til five and that's our life.'" [A version webbed by 570 News has two fact sheets at its end, one about the defendants and the other about the trial itself.]
A brief quote from Csr. Greenspan is near the end of a more extensive AP report, as webbed by MSN Money. After mentioning that the jury is now deliberating, it says: "The deliberations cap a trial that probed both the complex and the sensational. Its focus ranged from a blow-by-blow of Hollinger's newspaper transactions to the high-flying lifestyle of the aristocratic Black and whether he siphoned corporate money to pay for a vacation in Bora Bora, a surprise birthday party for his wife and apartments on Park Avenue in New York." Also mentioned is the claim by Eric Sussman, during the rebuttal, that a "'false pretense [that exists in this case] is that [a non-compete payments to the defendants is] non-compete money," Sussman said. 'It's really a bonus.'" WQAD.com has also webbed an AP fact sheet on the entire trial.
----------
A "Media Scout" report in Maisonneuve points out that the National Post print edition has devoted the first eleven pages to coverage of the Conrad Black trial and claims that most of it is slanted. The author, Daniel Tencer, also claims that Rosie DiManno's latest is slanted the other way.
More trial-centered is Matthew McClearn's review of the first part of Csr. Sussman's rebuttal in the Canadian Business Black trial blog. The beginning of it telegraphs the rest: "The prosecution’s rebuttal is, as one defence lawyer recently put it, 'a potent weapon.'... The lead prosecutor in the USA vs. Conrad Black et al trial in Chicago, Eric Sussman, did not make the most of this advantage. Even potent weapons need to be properly aimed to achieve maximum effect...."
Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, uses some colourful expressions to describe the media coverage of the trial's end and the deliberation's beginning.
Media Roundup: To The Deliberations
The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial are increasing in number now that jury deliberations are imminent:
1. Andrew Clark of the Guardian points out that Eric Sussman's follow-the-money exhortation was explicitly lifted from Deep Throat in All The President's Men. With respect to David Radler, Csr. Sussman acknowledged his bad character but also asked: "'David Radler is not Robin Hood... Why would he be stealing money to pay Conrad Black's mortgage?'" With respect to the oversight approval of the payments, Csr. Sussman called the Audit Committee members 'grossly negligent.'" Returning to an already-established prosecutorial theme, though, Csr Sussman observed, "'But, you know what?... Just because the security guard was asleep, doesn't mean the robbery didn't really happen.'"
2. From Law.com, an analyis of Ron Safer's closing address that mentions the theme of a "Top Ten list" that Csr. Safer himself used.
3. The New York Times has webbed an in-house report, entitled "Jurors Are Expected to Get Conrad Black’s Case Today," which reviews the entire trial, including Csr. Safer's closing argument and the portion of Csr. Sussman's rebuttal heard yesterday. It claims that the jurors will be getting about 100 pages of instructions. (Other sources have claimed 77.)
4. CTV News has webbed a report that begins by noting that Csr. Sussman claimed that "Conrad Black's defence, not the prosecution, has built its case on longtime Black partner David Radler..." In addition to summarizing yesterday's part of Csr. Sussman's rebuttal, it also quotes the version of the ostrich instruction that has been put in the entire set of them: "'If you find the defendant had a strong suspicion that criminal conduct was occurring, yet shut his eyes for fear of what he might learn, you can conclude he acted knowingly, and acting knowingly is a crime.'" The report also has links to three broadbanded CTV News video clips.
5. The trial has made #4 in an Irish (Dublin) Independent list of world news stories. It's entitled "Black could be jailed for life."
6. CANOE Money has webbed a Canadian Press briefing item which relates that the jury instructions will begin when Csr. Sussman is finished. The rest of his rebuttal is expected to take 90 minutes.
7. Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune has written a report that begins by noting: "In its final statement to the jury Tuesday, the government's lead attorney in the fraud trial of Conrad Black made an unexpected admission: 'Our star witness is not David Radler.'" After elaborating on Csr. Sussman's argument, he notes that "[t]he government's apparent about-face on Radler was a bizarre twist in the final days of the case against Black," and quotes Hugh Totten as expressing a similar bafflement. The rest of the report summarizes yesterday's part of the prosecutorial rebuttal.
8. Romina Maurino has written a report on Csr. Sussman's rebuttal, as webbed by the Hamilton Spectator, that begins with: "Government lawyers at the fraud trial of Conrad Black took one last stab at convincing jurors of the former press baron's guilt yesterday morning, reminding them of the prosecutors' contention he's both a liar and thief."
9. The London Free Press has a webbing of Peter Worthington's latest column. Mr. Worthington has included two items mentioned earlier by Mark Steyn: an objection by Csr. Sussman during the end of Csr. Safer's closing argument that blew up in his face, and the prosecutor's soft-spoken start. The column itself concentrates upon Csr. Safer's argument.
10. Paul Waldie has written a brief report, as webbed by the Globe and Mail, on the deliberation process for the jurors: each of them has to fill out a thirty-page form with tick boxes. They "must check off a box marked 'guilty' or 'not guilty' for each charge for each defendant." It ends by noting that they will have access to documents filed as evidence, but not testimony transcripts, "in part because throughout the trial, the judge met privately with lawyers during so-called side bars and those discussions, which are recorded, would have to be removed."
11. Mr. Waldie has another, longer report, also webbed by the Globe, which carries the calls of four lawyers who've been watching the trial: Steve Skurka, Andrew Stoltmann, Terry Sullivan and Hugh Totten. The reasons for each watcher's call is explained in the article, but here are the calls: Csr. Skurka - not guilty; Csr. Stoltmann - guilty on central charges; Csr. Sullivan - likely to be found not guilty; Csr. Totten - guilty on 2 charges, one of the fraud counts and the obstruction-of-justice charge.
12. CTV NewsNet aired a report from David Akin at 8:31 AM ET. In it, he said that the final part of the trial has gone longer than anticipated. Eric Sussman had just arrived at the time of the airing. He gets ribbed a lot, including sometimes by Judge St. Eve, because he looks a lot younger than he is. Mr. Akin described his rebuttal as “very dramatic.”
Regarding the instructions: there are 90 of them, all scripted. As a generality, they urge jurors to rely upon their common sense and their own memories. As far as the length of deliberation time is concerned, the general rule of thumb is one sitting day per week of a trial. This jury, though, is indicating that they’ll take a shorter time than that. As an example, Mr. Akin cited a request to sit for only a half-day this coming Friday. It would have been consistent with a long deliberation for them to ask to sit all day Friday. The jurors decide when they sit in deliberation, and for how long.
13. A third report by Mr. Waldie, webbed by the Globe as well, sums up Csr. Sussman's rebuttal. It notes that yesterday's part of the rebuttal took about four hours, and that the jurors are mostly "middle-aged women." It also notes that Csr. Sussman "tried to shore up the credibility of [the] members of the audit committee of Hollinger's board" during his rebuttal.
14. The latest report by Janet Whitman of the New York Post is entitled "Black's Jury Gets Anxious To Close." After noting that three jurors wanted to stay late yesterday, an item mentioned yesterday by Mr. Steyn, it notes further that "[j]urors' growing impatience with the sluggish pace of closing arguments by prosecutors and lawyers for Black and his three co-defendants could be a sign they will return with a speedy verdict."
15. Rosie DiManno's latest report, webbed by the Toronto Star, begins by noting that Csr. Sussman's rebuttal had gotten twenty-four objections, with only one sustained. She casts the prosecutor as a dutiful speechmaker dogged by sometime frivolous objections.
16. CBC Newsworld aired a report from Heather Hiscox at 9:07 AM ET. She said that it's almost a certainty that the jury will begin deliberating today. The instructions to the jury have been placed online. They go into reasonable doubt, saying that it is the jurors’ responsibility to assess. The instruction list also stresses that the defendants have the right not to testify. Mr. Radler’s testimony is also addressed: there's a reminder of his plea bargain, and the relevant instruction notes that it's not directly relevant to the defendants’ guilt. The jury must assess his testimony on its merits. Ms. Hiscox also mentioned the ostrich instruction, and said that Judge St. Eve should start this morning. Her report also contained a brief interview with Eddie Greenspan, who mentions that the Canadian system does not have prosecutor’s rebuttal.
17. Also aired on CBC Newsworld, at 9:20 AM ET, was an interview with Paul Waldie. He said that he was surprised at the length of the rebuttal, noting that it seems that the prosecution has to undo a lot of damage. Also surprising was the prosecution distancing itself from Mr. Radler’s testimony. In addition, Mr. Waldie related the general use of the ostrich instruction, and how it’s used in white-collar-crime cases. It was used successfully in Enron and WorldCom cases. The instruction about the Radler plea bargain was standard, but the defense has made a big point of it. Regarding the economic-status-irrelevant part of the no-discrimination instruction: it is standard, but the jury was vetted for economic or title bias at the trial’s beginning.
As far as the trial itself is concerned, Mr. Waldie was surprised at the amount of strategizing that’s been part of it. He was also impressed at the openness of the trial process in the United States.
18. Mike Hornbrook was also interviewed on CBC Newsworld, as of about 9:35 AM. He called attention to an instruction that may hurt Conrad Black: retroactive approval of transactions by an oversight body is okay, but there must be full disclosure of all relevant facts to make it legitimate.
19. From Iafrica.com Business, a summation of the case, entitled "Lord Black's fate handed to jury."
20. Another CTV News report, entitled "Jurors expected to take Black's case today," has a link to a PDF copy of the instructions to the jury. [Direct link here.]
21. A brief report from the Daily Mail has as its centerpiece a photo of Conrad Black with Barbara, and his daughter Alana standing behind both.
22. An AHN News report suns up the arguments of the prosecution and defense.
23. From CBC News, a report that starts off by anticipating the instructions. It also summarizes the rebuttal so far.
24. The Guelph Mercury summarizes yesterday's part of the rebuttal by focusing on the follow-the-money theme.
----------
In a brief entry in his Maclean's Conrad Black Trial blog, Mark Steyn cheerily observes that the jury will begin deliberating today, unless they don't.
1. Andrew Clark of the Guardian points out that Eric Sussman's follow-the-money exhortation was explicitly lifted from Deep Throat in All The President's Men. With respect to David Radler, Csr. Sussman acknowledged his bad character but also asked: "'David Radler is not Robin Hood... Why would he be stealing money to pay Conrad Black's mortgage?'" With respect to the oversight approval of the payments, Csr. Sussman called the Audit Committee members 'grossly negligent.'" Returning to an already-established prosecutorial theme, though, Csr Sussman observed, "'But, you know what?... Just because the security guard was asleep, doesn't mean the robbery didn't really happen.'"
2. From Law.com, an analyis of Ron Safer's closing address that mentions the theme of a "Top Ten list" that Csr. Safer himself used.
3. The New York Times has webbed an in-house report, entitled "Jurors Are Expected to Get Conrad Black’s Case Today," which reviews the entire trial, including Csr. Safer's closing argument and the portion of Csr. Sussman's rebuttal heard yesterday. It claims that the jurors will be getting about 100 pages of instructions. (Other sources have claimed 77.)
4. CTV News has webbed a report that begins by noting that Csr. Sussman claimed that "Conrad Black's defence, not the prosecution, has built its case on longtime Black partner David Radler..." In addition to summarizing yesterday's part of Csr. Sussman's rebuttal, it also quotes the version of the ostrich instruction that has been put in the entire set of them: "'If you find the defendant had a strong suspicion that criminal conduct was occurring, yet shut his eyes for fear of what he might learn, you can conclude he acted knowingly, and acting knowingly is a crime.'" The report also has links to three broadbanded CTV News video clips.
5. The trial has made #4 in an Irish (Dublin) Independent list of world news stories. It's entitled "Black could be jailed for life."
6. CANOE Money has webbed a Canadian Press briefing item which relates that the jury instructions will begin when Csr. Sussman is finished. The rest of his rebuttal is expected to take 90 minutes.
7. Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune has written a report that begins by noting: "In its final statement to the jury Tuesday, the government's lead attorney in the fraud trial of Conrad Black made an unexpected admission: 'Our star witness is not David Radler.'" After elaborating on Csr. Sussman's argument, he notes that "[t]he government's apparent about-face on Radler was a bizarre twist in the final days of the case against Black," and quotes Hugh Totten as expressing a similar bafflement. The rest of the report summarizes yesterday's part of the prosecutorial rebuttal.
8. Romina Maurino has written a report on Csr. Sussman's rebuttal, as webbed by the Hamilton Spectator, that begins with: "Government lawyers at the fraud trial of Conrad Black took one last stab at convincing jurors of the former press baron's guilt yesterday morning, reminding them of the prosecutors' contention he's both a liar and thief."
9. The London Free Press has a webbing of Peter Worthington's latest column. Mr. Worthington has included two items mentioned earlier by Mark Steyn: an objection by Csr. Sussman during the end of Csr. Safer's closing argument that blew up in his face, and the prosecutor's soft-spoken start. The column itself concentrates upon Csr. Safer's argument.
10. Paul Waldie has written a brief report, as webbed by the Globe and Mail, on the deliberation process for the jurors: each of them has to fill out a thirty-page form with tick boxes. They "must check off a box marked 'guilty' or 'not guilty' for each charge for each defendant." It ends by noting that they will have access to documents filed as evidence, but not testimony transcripts, "in part because throughout the trial, the judge met privately with lawyers during so-called side bars and those discussions, which are recorded, would have to be removed."
11. Mr. Waldie has another, longer report, also webbed by the Globe, which carries the calls of four lawyers who've been watching the trial: Steve Skurka, Andrew Stoltmann, Terry Sullivan and Hugh Totten. The reasons for each watcher's call is explained in the article, but here are the calls: Csr. Skurka - not guilty; Csr. Stoltmann - guilty on central charges; Csr. Sullivan - likely to be found not guilty; Csr. Totten - guilty on 2 charges, one of the fraud counts and the obstruction-of-justice charge.
12. CTV NewsNet aired a report from David Akin at 8:31 AM ET. In it, he said that the final part of the trial has gone longer than anticipated. Eric Sussman had just arrived at the time of the airing. He gets ribbed a lot, including sometimes by Judge St. Eve, because he looks a lot younger than he is. Mr. Akin described his rebuttal as “very dramatic.”
Regarding the instructions: there are 90 of them, all scripted. As a generality, they urge jurors to rely upon their common sense and their own memories. As far as the length of deliberation time is concerned, the general rule of thumb is one sitting day per week of a trial. This jury, though, is indicating that they’ll take a shorter time than that. As an example, Mr. Akin cited a request to sit for only a half-day this coming Friday. It would have been consistent with a long deliberation for them to ask to sit all day Friday. The jurors decide when they sit in deliberation, and for how long.
13. A third report by Mr. Waldie, webbed by the Globe as well, sums up Csr. Sussman's rebuttal. It notes that yesterday's part of the rebuttal took about four hours, and that the jurors are mostly "middle-aged women." It also notes that Csr. Sussman "tried to shore up the credibility of [the] members of the audit committee of Hollinger's board" during his rebuttal.
14. The latest report by Janet Whitman of the New York Post is entitled "Black's Jury Gets Anxious To Close." After noting that three jurors wanted to stay late yesterday, an item mentioned yesterday by Mr. Steyn, it notes further that "[j]urors' growing impatience with the sluggish pace of closing arguments by prosecutors and lawyers for Black and his three co-defendants could be a sign they will return with a speedy verdict."
15. Rosie DiManno's latest report, webbed by the Toronto Star, begins by noting that Csr. Sussman's rebuttal had gotten twenty-four objections, with only one sustained. She casts the prosecutor as a dutiful speechmaker dogged by sometime frivolous objections.
16. CBC Newsworld aired a report from Heather Hiscox at 9:07 AM ET. She said that it's almost a certainty that the jury will begin deliberating today. The instructions to the jury have been placed online. They go into reasonable doubt, saying that it is the jurors’ responsibility to assess. The instruction list also stresses that the defendants have the right not to testify. Mr. Radler’s testimony is also addressed: there's a reminder of his plea bargain, and the relevant instruction notes that it's not directly relevant to the defendants’ guilt. The jury must assess his testimony on its merits. Ms. Hiscox also mentioned the ostrich instruction, and said that Judge St. Eve should start this morning. Her report also contained a brief interview with Eddie Greenspan, who mentions that the Canadian system does not have prosecutor’s rebuttal.
17. Also aired on CBC Newsworld, at 9:20 AM ET, was an interview with Paul Waldie. He said that he was surprised at the length of the rebuttal, noting that it seems that the prosecution has to undo a lot of damage. Also surprising was the prosecution distancing itself from Mr. Radler’s testimony. In addition, Mr. Waldie related the general use of the ostrich instruction, and how it’s used in white-collar-crime cases. It was used successfully in Enron and WorldCom cases. The instruction about the Radler plea bargain was standard, but the defense has made a big point of it. Regarding the economic-status-irrelevant part of the no-discrimination instruction: it is standard, but the jury was vetted for economic or title bias at the trial’s beginning.
As far as the trial itself is concerned, Mr. Waldie was surprised at the amount of strategizing that’s been part of it. He was also impressed at the openness of the trial process in the United States.
18. Mike Hornbrook was also interviewed on CBC Newsworld, as of about 9:35 AM. He called attention to an instruction that may hurt Conrad Black: retroactive approval of transactions by an oversight body is okay, but there must be full disclosure of all relevant facts to make it legitimate.
19. From Iafrica.com Business, a summation of the case, entitled "Lord Black's fate handed to jury."
20. Another CTV News report, entitled "Jurors expected to take Black's case today," has a link to a PDF copy of the instructions to the jury. [Direct link here.]
21. A brief report from the Daily Mail has as its centerpiece a photo of Conrad Black with Barbara, and his daughter Alana standing behind both.
22. An AHN News report suns up the arguments of the prosecution and defense.
23. From CBC News, a report that starts off by anticipating the instructions. It also summarizes the rebuttal so far.
24. The Guelph Mercury summarizes yesterday's part of the rebuttal by focusing on the follow-the-money theme.
----------
In a brief entry in his Maclean's Conrad Black Trial blog, Mark Steyn cheerily observes that the jury will begin deliberating today, unless they don't.
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
CBC's "The National" Report On The Day's Proceedings
CBC News's The National had a report on the events in Conrad Black trial that took place today, by CBC correspondent Neil Macdonald. Mr. Macdonald mentioned Mr. Black’s “poker face,” which he characteristically shows in the courtroom, but speculated that the strain on Conrad Black must be incredible.
The defense is finished now. Eric Sussman hammered away at Black all through the prosecutorial rebuttal. He said that David Radler was a fraudster and a liar, but it doesn’t affect his testimony. Mr. Radler and Mr. Black are the same, except for the former showing remorse. Csr. Sussman also urged jurors to follow the money.
Near the end of his report, Mr. Maconald mentioned that Judge St. Eve will instruct jury to disregard considerations of wealth, and will tell them to use their common sense.
The defense is finished now. Eric Sussman hammered away at Black all through the prosecutorial rebuttal. He said that David Radler was a fraudster and a liar, but it doesn’t affect his testimony. Mr. Radler and Mr. Black are the same, except for the former showing remorse. Csr. Sussman also urged jurors to follow the money.
Near the end of his report, Mr. Maconald mentioned that Judge St. Eve will instruct jury to disregard considerations of wealth, and will tell them to use their common sense.
The Verdict: Plumbing The Instructions
Tonight's episode of The Verdict had a segment discussing the Conrad Black trial which was divided into two parts. The first, with CTV reporter David Akin, discussed the prosecutorial rebuttal; the second, with former prosecutor Pat Woodward and trial-watcher Hugh Totten, analyzed the advance copy of the jury instructions.
Mr. Akin said that Eric Sussman took up some of the morning and most of the afternoon for the rebuttal; he has one more hour scheduled, which he asked for and got. Mr. Akin doesn’t know why Csr. Sussman is dragging it out beyond the total of two hours he was expected to take. It could be that he wants to elaborate, as much as possible, on those prosecution-favorable parts of the judge’s instructions, such as the ostrich instruction, to the jury. As far as Conrad Black's demeanor in court was concerned, he was happy enough when Ron Safer was up, but wasn't when Csr. Sussman was up. When pointed to by the assistant U.S. attorney, according to Mr. Akin, Mr. Black looked "black". He had to face the ‘thief’ accusation.
Right after, the focus turned to Csr. Woodward's and Csr. Totten's analyses. The former believes that the government did rather well in the jurors' instructions. He mentioned the definitions of “honest services,” “good faith,” and the ostrich instruction as support for that conclusion.
Csr. Totten believes that the list of instructions is fairly standard. The defense should benefit from the instruction to treat David Radler's testimony with “caution and great care,” but will not benefit from the “reasonably foreseeable” criterion related to the obstruction-of- justice charge. It’s a wider standard than "knowledge" would have been. The ostrich instruction will impact Mr. Black’s two-chiefs theory, but it could hurt the other defendants more. Csr. Woodward noted that the caution-and-care standard won’t necessarily impact Mr. Radler’s testimony. It’ll just make the jurors more careful.
Csr. Totten brought up the prosecution’s point about the testimony of the four buyers verbatim, which the prosecution has claimed went unchallenged. After being asked by Ms. Todd about about the fact that contract was signed, he (assuming that she was referring to the non-compete contracts and not the overall sales contracts themselves) repeated the prosecution’s point that the enforcibility of the contract says nothing about whether or not it was consented to. Csr. Woodward finished up the analysis by saying that the contract with the self-dealing was the diciest for the defense.
Mr. Akin said that Eric Sussman took up some of the morning and most of the afternoon for the rebuttal; he has one more hour scheduled, which he asked for and got. Mr. Akin doesn’t know why Csr. Sussman is dragging it out beyond the total of two hours he was expected to take. It could be that he wants to elaborate, as much as possible, on those prosecution-favorable parts of the judge’s instructions, such as the ostrich instruction, to the jury. As far as Conrad Black's demeanor in court was concerned, he was happy enough when Ron Safer was up, but wasn't when Csr. Sussman was up. When pointed to by the assistant U.S. attorney, according to Mr. Akin, Mr. Black looked "black". He had to face the ‘thief’ accusation.
Right after, the focus turned to Csr. Woodward's and Csr. Totten's analyses. The former believes that the government did rather well in the jurors' instructions. He mentioned the definitions of “honest services,” “good faith,” and the ostrich instruction as support for that conclusion.
Csr. Totten believes that the list of instructions is fairly standard. The defense should benefit from the instruction to treat David Radler's testimony with “caution and great care,” but will not benefit from the “reasonably foreseeable” criterion related to the obstruction-of- justice charge. It’s a wider standard than "knowledge" would have been. The ostrich instruction will impact Mr. Black’s two-chiefs theory, but it could hurt the other defendants more. Csr. Woodward noted that the caution-and-care standard won’t necessarily impact Mr. Radler’s testimony. It’ll just make the jurors more careful.
Csr. Totten brought up the prosecution’s point about the testimony of the four buyers verbatim, which the prosecution has claimed went unchallenged. After being asked by Ms. Todd about about the fact that contract was signed, he (assuming that she was referring to the non-compete contracts and not the overall sales contracts themselves) repeated the prosecution’s point that the enforcibility of the contract says nothing about whether or not it was consented to. Csr. Woodward finished up the analysis by saying that the contract with the self-dealing was the diciest for the defense.
Wrapping It Up (The Final Duel)
Mark Steyn, once again, has the first details on the rest of Ron Safer's closing argument for Mark Kipnis. The excerpt he has reported on features Csr. Safer turning an objection from Eric Sussman to his client's advantage. After Csr. Sussman objected to a statement on the grounds that Csr. Safer was speculating on what his client knew or didn't know, Csr. Safer shot back: "'Exactly! That's the very point I'm making." The room fell around laughing, and defence counsel jabbed his finger at the chief prosecutor: 'THEY have the burden of proof. A tie doesn't go to the government.'"
Another excerpt reported on by Mr. Steyn features Csr. Safer debunking the characterization by Julie Ruder that Hollinger Inc. was a mere holding company by raising the point that Hollinger International itself was a mere holding company; the operator company was American Publishing. In addition, Csr. Safer pointed out two Chicago-based companies, one of them being the Harris Bank, are Canadian-owned, implying that Canadian ownership does not itself imply shady dealings.
BNN has gotten its hands on an advance copy of Judge St. Eve's instructions to the jury. The total of them makes up a document 77 pages in length. One mentioned on the noon newscast was an instruction to disregard any considerations based on race, sex, religion, (etc.) and national origin. The other, more specific, instruction mentioned on the newscast tells the jury to consider David Radler's guilty plea irrelevant to the guilt of any of the four defendants.
Mr. Steyn has reported that Csr. Safer is finished. He compliments the counsellor for tying together disjointed bits of testimony that were largely considered ignorable at the time when they were elicited. (It's quite the flipside to the general praise for Julie Ruder, who was lauded for displaying the same organizational skill. As of now, Csr. Sussman has a final opportunity to show that same skill.)
Romina Maurino's report, as webbed by 680 News, recaps the main theme of Csr. Safer's closing address: "'This whole scheme, he doesn't understand, he doesn't know the motive for... He's an outsider. He is not in top management. He is not in decision-making... He is not in the social circle. He is an employee and he's happy.'" It also notes that the proceedings had gone quickly in the morning.
Amanda Lang, in a BNN interview aired at 1:54 PM ET, had these highlights of the prosecution rebuttal, as delivered by Eric Sussman. He said that each defendant had a “moment of truth.” Ms. Lang passed along three of them. For Conrad Black, it occurred when he signed an agreement not to “compete with himself,” and also when he inserted himself into CanWest non-compete agreement. For Jack Boultbee, it took place when he accepted a $450,000 payment for a non-compete agreement even though the buyers of the associated newspaper property didn't know of him. For Mark Kipnis, it occurred when he, after waiting for permission to write some names on a wire transfer payment and not getting them, wrote those names himself on it. Csr. Sussman also said that the enforcability of the non-compete contracts is irrelevant; the point is the buyers didn’t want them. He also said that David Radler was peripheral to the overall case. Additionally, he made the point that that the defense lawyers, as a group, have called 13 government witnesses liars, and itemized their names.
Ms. Lang also reported that it's still possible that Judge St. Eve will have to deliver the instructions to the jury tomorrow morning.
Moving back to Csr. Safer's closing address, Mr. Steyn has reported on the capstone to it: there was only one transaction, out of all of them, that was culpable - the original American Trucker sale. "Radler and Todd Vogt ('and where's Todd Vogt?' asked Counsellor Safer, noting the government's conspicuous avoidance of one of the key figures in the Radler operation) transferred $2 million from the Trucker sale from International to Inc with no non-compete, no Audit Committee approval, no nothing. 'He had no way out on American Trucker,' said Safer. 'None... On American Trucker alone, he's going to jail for more than 29 months.'" In other words, the only crime committed was the one fraud count that Mr. Radler pleaded guilty to, and Mr. Radler alone was reponsible for it, according to Csr. Safer. In order to minimize his punishment, Mr. Radler had cut a deal which left most of his wealth intact.
A Reuters report, written by Andrew Stern, starts with this part of Csr. Safer's closing address: "Directors who oversaw Conrad Black's former publishing empire approved everything that was put in front of them including the millions of dollars prosecutors claim was stolen, a lawyer for one of the former media baron's co-defendants told jurors on Tuesday." In other words, if the oversight body had been satisfied, then presumptively there was no crime.
Paul Waldie, with some help from the Canadian Press, has more details on Csr. Sussman's closing address, as webbed by the Globe and Mail. According to his report, the prosecutor stressed the allegation that the defendants had lied, and also averred: "'You don't need to believe a single word from David Radler to convict them.' He said [further that] the defence had not addressed the testimony of the buyers of Hollinger newspapers who said they did not want non-competition agreements with the men."
The Bloomberg report, written by Andrew Harris and Joe Schneider, contains the background on the prosecution characterization of one non-compete agreement as Conrad Black "'paying himself not to compete with himself.'" The deal in question took place in "March 1999 [when] Hollinger agreed to sell $43.7 million of newspapers to Horizon Publications, a Marion, Illinois company in which Black and Radler owned substantial interests, the government says. The noncompete agreement in that deal meant they were paying themselves not to compete with themselves, the government says. Sussman was referring to the Horizon deal today." It also quotes Hugh Totten, who opined that the closing arguments were too long.
The Chicago Tribune has webbed an Associated Press report that covers both Csr. Safer's finish and Csr. Sussman's rebuttal. From the latter, it quotes a batback from Csr. Sussman about David Radler being the star witness: "Lead prosecutor Eric Sussman said as he began his rebuttal to the defense that he would not apologize for calling David Radler as a witness [despite his tattered word and conduct]... 'We didn't pick the star witness,' he said. Wheeling around, he then pointed at the defendants one by one and said 'Conrad Black picked him .... Peter Atkinson picked him .... John Boultbee picked him.'" The report also notes Mr. Black's reaction to being pointed to at that moment.
A rewritten version of the Reuters report starts off with more details from the rebuttal: "Prosecutors trying to seal their case on Tuesday against former media baron Conrad Black and his associates told jurors about to decide their fate that defense lawyers failed to refute the core fraud charges against the four men." It further relates that Csr. Sussman accused the defense of dancing around the central part of the case: "'Not a single one faced the issue head-on. Why were these men allowed to take money and then lie about it?'"
Other excerpts are in an updated report by Ms. Maurino, as webbed by Canada East Online. It relates that Csr. Sussman claimed that "Black and his three co-accused 'lied to the shareholders... while they ignored their duties.'" Near its end, there are excerpts from the upcoming instructions to the jury. Two examples: "'You are to decide whether the testimony of each of the witnesses is truthful and accurate, in part, in whole, or not at all, as well as what weight, if any, you give to the testimony of each witness... In our lives, we often look at one fact and conclude from it that another fact exists. In law we call this 'inference.' A jury is allowed to make reasonable inferences. Any inferences you make must be reasonable and must be based on the evidence in the case.'"
BNN aired a segment on "Squeeze Play" with two guests, former prosecutors Bill Loller and Terry Sullivan, to discuss how the prosecution has done in the rebuttal, as wll as the significance of the instructions to the jury. Csr. Loller said that those instructions are not just a formality. The jurors pay close attention to the wordings. The instructions also specify what is to be disregarded.
With respect to the charges, Csr. Sullivan said that the defense “did a lot of damage” to the prosecution’s case. Csr. Sussman tried to distance the prosecution from Mr. Radler. The jury may not notice, but the prosecution has in fact backpedaled a lot. They're still trying to drag in lifestyle issues, esp. regarding the moving of the boxes, asking why a rich man would move them himself. As a result of this concentration, the jurors may be anesthetized to the numbers and figures.
Csr. Loller pointed to the fact that no victims were ever presented. The jury may wonder where they are. He also opined that the prosecution may have hoped for defense disunity when they decided to try the four together. If so, then they were disappointed. Csr. Sullivan agreed, and noted that the prosecution did mention that the jury did not have to convict all of them in order to convict one of them. He also noted the same thing that Mark Steyn had noted earlier: three jurors wanted to stay late so as to get the instructions over with.
Csr. Loller ended his part by saying that the case wound up being more complex and ambiguous than anticipated, and opined that the lack of victims presented may hurt the prosecution's chances. Csr. Sullivan noted, though, that Conrad Black must be acquitted entirely to avoid serious time, thanks to the pre-existing sentencing guildelines for crimes of this nature.
Another BNN report, once again with Amanda Lang reporting, was aired at 6:40 PM. She said that Csr. Sussman did a “nimble job” in his rebuttal. She added to her earlier report by noting that Sussman had said that all thirteen different witnesses had to have lied in order for the defense's arguments to be credible. Regarding the instructions to the jury, she reported that they will not be given today, and are scheduled for tomorrow. The ostrich instruction is good for the prosecutiuon, but Judge St. Eve has added one that's good for the defense: a note that the Securities and Exchange Commission has the power to retrospectively authorize certain items.
Despite the expectation that the instructions would be given to the jury today, the rebuttal wasn't even finished, according to a CP report webbed by 570 News. Csr. Sussman will finsh tomorrow, after which the instructions will be given. An AP summary report, webbed by WQAD.com, also carries the expectation that the jurors will get the instructions tomorrow.
Finally, a report from BBC News has a summarization of the entire case, plus the defense's overall stand.
-----------
If you're a Murdoch-watcher as well, you should be interested in this item: BNN announced on its noon newscast that News Corp and the Bancroft family have reached a preliminary agreement regarding the former's attempted takeover of Dow-Jones in the area of protecting editorial independence. A related Reuters news report on this story is here.
To move back to a focus on the trial itself, Douglas Bell, in his regular top-stories beat for the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial, has picked up on the distancing of Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Kipnis from the other two defendants.
Unusually for Mr. Steyn, his opening comment on Csr. Sussman's rebuttal observes the prosecutor's mutedness. Mr. Steyn has speculated that the assistant U.S. attorney was ordered to deliver it calmly. "I think he's been told not to be too cocky, and as a result he's sounding listless... An odd start."
Also, the live discussion at the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog was started. The transcript for it can be read here.
Another excerpt reported on by Mr. Steyn features Csr. Safer debunking the characterization by Julie Ruder that Hollinger Inc. was a mere holding company by raising the point that Hollinger International itself was a mere holding company; the operator company was American Publishing. In addition, Csr. Safer pointed out two Chicago-based companies, one of them being the Harris Bank, are Canadian-owned, implying that Canadian ownership does not itself imply shady dealings.
BNN has gotten its hands on an advance copy of Judge St. Eve's instructions to the jury. The total of them makes up a document 77 pages in length. One mentioned on the noon newscast was an instruction to disregard any considerations based on race, sex, religion, (etc.) and national origin. The other, more specific, instruction mentioned on the newscast tells the jury to consider David Radler's guilty plea irrelevant to the guilt of any of the four defendants.
Mr. Steyn has reported that Csr. Safer is finished. He compliments the counsellor for tying together disjointed bits of testimony that were largely considered ignorable at the time when they were elicited. (It's quite the flipside to the general praise for Julie Ruder, who was lauded for displaying the same organizational skill. As of now, Csr. Sussman has a final opportunity to show that same skill.)
Romina Maurino's report, as webbed by 680 News, recaps the main theme of Csr. Safer's closing address: "'This whole scheme, he doesn't understand, he doesn't know the motive for... He's an outsider. He is not in top management. He is not in decision-making... He is not in the social circle. He is an employee and he's happy.'" It also notes that the proceedings had gone quickly in the morning.
Amanda Lang, in a BNN interview aired at 1:54 PM ET, had these highlights of the prosecution rebuttal, as delivered by Eric Sussman. He said that each defendant had a “moment of truth.” Ms. Lang passed along three of them. For Conrad Black, it occurred when he signed an agreement not to “compete with himself,” and also when he inserted himself into CanWest non-compete agreement. For Jack Boultbee, it took place when he accepted a $450,000 payment for a non-compete agreement even though the buyers of the associated newspaper property didn't know of him. For Mark Kipnis, it occurred when he, after waiting for permission to write some names on a wire transfer payment and not getting them, wrote those names himself on it. Csr. Sussman also said that the enforcability of the non-compete contracts is irrelevant; the point is the buyers didn’t want them. He also said that David Radler was peripheral to the overall case. Additionally, he made the point that that the defense lawyers, as a group, have called 13 government witnesses liars, and itemized their names.
Ms. Lang also reported that it's still possible that Judge St. Eve will have to deliver the instructions to the jury tomorrow morning.
Moving back to Csr. Safer's closing address, Mr. Steyn has reported on the capstone to it: there was only one transaction, out of all of them, that was culpable - the original American Trucker sale. "Radler and Todd Vogt ('and where's Todd Vogt?' asked Counsellor Safer, noting the government's conspicuous avoidance of one of the key figures in the Radler operation) transferred $2 million from the Trucker sale from International to Inc with no non-compete, no Audit Committee approval, no nothing. 'He had no way out on American Trucker,' said Safer. 'None... On American Trucker alone, he's going to jail for more than 29 months.'" In other words, the only crime committed was the one fraud count that Mr. Radler pleaded guilty to, and Mr. Radler alone was reponsible for it, according to Csr. Safer. In order to minimize his punishment, Mr. Radler had cut a deal which left most of his wealth intact.
A Reuters report, written by Andrew Stern, starts with this part of Csr. Safer's closing address: "Directors who oversaw Conrad Black's former publishing empire approved everything that was put in front of them including the millions of dollars prosecutors claim was stolen, a lawyer for one of the former media baron's co-defendants told jurors on Tuesday." In other words, if the oversight body had been satisfied, then presumptively there was no crime.
Paul Waldie, with some help from the Canadian Press, has more details on Csr. Sussman's closing address, as webbed by the Globe and Mail. According to his report, the prosecutor stressed the allegation that the defendants had lied, and also averred: "'You don't need to believe a single word from David Radler to convict them.' He said [further that] the defence had not addressed the testimony of the buyers of Hollinger newspapers who said they did not want non-competition agreements with the men."
The Bloomberg report, written by Andrew Harris and Joe Schneider, contains the background on the prosecution characterization of one non-compete agreement as Conrad Black "'paying himself not to compete with himself.'" The deal in question took place in "March 1999 [when] Hollinger agreed to sell $43.7 million of newspapers to Horizon Publications, a Marion, Illinois company in which Black and Radler owned substantial interests, the government says. The noncompete agreement in that deal meant they were paying themselves not to compete with themselves, the government says. Sussman was referring to the Horizon deal today." It also quotes Hugh Totten, who opined that the closing arguments were too long.
The Chicago Tribune has webbed an Associated Press report that covers both Csr. Safer's finish and Csr. Sussman's rebuttal. From the latter, it quotes a batback from Csr. Sussman about David Radler being the star witness: "Lead prosecutor Eric Sussman said as he began his rebuttal to the defense that he would not apologize for calling David Radler as a witness [despite his tattered word and conduct]... 'We didn't pick the star witness,' he said. Wheeling around, he then pointed at the defendants one by one and said 'Conrad Black picked him .... Peter Atkinson picked him .... John Boultbee picked him.'" The report also notes Mr. Black's reaction to being pointed to at that moment.
A rewritten version of the Reuters report starts off with more details from the rebuttal: "Prosecutors trying to seal their case on Tuesday against former media baron Conrad Black and his associates told jurors about to decide their fate that defense lawyers failed to refute the core fraud charges against the four men." It further relates that Csr. Sussman accused the defense of dancing around the central part of the case: "'Not a single one faced the issue head-on. Why were these men allowed to take money and then lie about it?'"
Other excerpts are in an updated report by Ms. Maurino, as webbed by Canada East Online. It relates that Csr. Sussman claimed that "Black and his three co-accused 'lied to the shareholders... while they ignored their duties.'" Near its end, there are excerpts from the upcoming instructions to the jury. Two examples: "'You are to decide whether the testimony of each of the witnesses is truthful and accurate, in part, in whole, or not at all, as well as what weight, if any, you give to the testimony of each witness... In our lives, we often look at one fact and conclude from it that another fact exists. In law we call this 'inference.' A jury is allowed to make reasonable inferences. Any inferences you make must be reasonable and must be based on the evidence in the case.'"
BNN aired a segment on "Squeeze Play" with two guests, former prosecutors Bill Loller and Terry Sullivan, to discuss how the prosecution has done in the rebuttal, as wll as the significance of the instructions to the jury. Csr. Loller said that those instructions are not just a formality. The jurors pay close attention to the wordings. The instructions also specify what is to be disregarded.
With respect to the charges, Csr. Sullivan said that the defense “did a lot of damage” to the prosecution’s case. Csr. Sussman tried to distance the prosecution from Mr. Radler. The jury may not notice, but the prosecution has in fact backpedaled a lot. They're still trying to drag in lifestyle issues, esp. regarding the moving of the boxes, asking why a rich man would move them himself. As a result of this concentration, the jurors may be anesthetized to the numbers and figures.
Csr. Loller pointed to the fact that no victims were ever presented. The jury may wonder where they are. He also opined that the prosecution may have hoped for defense disunity when they decided to try the four together. If so, then they were disappointed. Csr. Sullivan agreed, and noted that the prosecution did mention that the jury did not have to convict all of them in order to convict one of them. He also noted the same thing that Mark Steyn had noted earlier: three jurors wanted to stay late so as to get the instructions over with.
Csr. Loller ended his part by saying that the case wound up being more complex and ambiguous than anticipated, and opined that the lack of victims presented may hurt the prosecution's chances. Csr. Sullivan noted, though, that Conrad Black must be acquitted entirely to avoid serious time, thanks to the pre-existing sentencing guildelines for crimes of this nature.
Another BNN report, once again with Amanda Lang reporting, was aired at 6:40 PM. She said that Csr. Sussman did a “nimble job” in his rebuttal. She added to her earlier report by noting that Sussman had said that all thirteen different witnesses had to have lied in order for the defense's arguments to be credible. Regarding the instructions to the jury, she reported that they will not be given today, and are scheduled for tomorrow. The ostrich instruction is good for the prosecutiuon, but Judge St. Eve has added one that's good for the defense: a note that the Securities and Exchange Commission has the power to retrospectively authorize certain items.
Despite the expectation that the instructions would be given to the jury today, the rebuttal wasn't even finished, according to a CP report webbed by 570 News. Csr. Sussman will finsh tomorrow, after which the instructions will be given. An AP summary report, webbed by WQAD.com, also carries the expectation that the jurors will get the instructions tomorrow.
Finally, a report from BBC News has a summarization of the entire case, plus the defense's overall stand.
-----------
If you're a Murdoch-watcher as well, you should be interested in this item: BNN announced on its noon newscast that News Corp and the Bancroft family have reached a preliminary agreement regarding the former's attempted takeover of Dow-Jones in the area of protecting editorial independence. A related Reuters news report on this story is here.
To move back to a focus on the trial itself, Douglas Bell, in his regular top-stories beat for the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial, has picked up on the distancing of Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Kipnis from the other two defendants.
Unusually for Mr. Steyn, his opening comment on Csr. Sussman's rebuttal observes the prosecutor's mutedness. Mr. Steyn has speculated that the assistant U.S. attorney was ordered to deliver it calmly. "I think he's been told not to be too cocky, and as a result he's sounding listless... An odd start."
Also, the live discussion at the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog was started. The transcript for it can be read here.
Media Roundup: Anticipation
The media report, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial are focusing on the nearing end of it:
1. The New York Times has webbed an abridged version of the Bloomberg report on yesterday's part of Ron Safer's argument, which opens with the theme that Mark Kipnis violating the law would be contrary to habit.
2. CBC News: Morning had an update with Heather Hiscox, aired at 7:30 AM. She said that trial is behind schedule; the jury should have been deliberating by now. Once Csr. Safer's closing argument is over with, the prosecution will make its rebuttal, in which no new evidence can be introduced. It may take a little longer than 2 hours. One the judge's instructions are finished, the jurors are expected to take a week to decide, as the case is “complicated.” The coverage in Chicago hasn't been the front-page item that it has been in Toronto; there's only been inside-paper coverage in the Tribune, the paper that's been following it most closely.
Harry Forestell, in London U.K., said that the trial's not been much of an item since the trial began, It’s been followed, but not on the front page. London’s Establishment has long “forgotten” Conrad Black, and the U.K. media has long lost interest in the lifestyle details. There’s also lots of scandals to choose from. This relative sparseness is not likely to change until the verdict is reached.
3. Peter Worthington's latest column on the trial, as webbed by the Ottawa Sun, discusses the last two closing arguments for the defense. He focuses on the one given by Csr. Safer, who he describes as the lawyer who "batted cleanup for the defence." Near the end, Mr. Worthington reports that "Safer urged the jury to be 'very, very suspicious of the government's case' -- and what the prosecution's rebuttal today will contain."
4. From Andrew Clark of the Guardian, a report on the end of Michael Schachter's closing argument for Peter Atkinson. It begins with: "Prosecutors in Conrad Black's racketeering trial are looking at the world through 'dirty windows' that give even the most innocent acts a murky sheen, defence lawyers contended yesterday."
5. The latest report by Ameet Sachdev, webbed by the Chicago Tribune, is about Csr. Safer's closing argument. In addition to summarizing his argument, it contains a few of his one-liners. One example: "'When a lawyer starts talking in Latin, watch out,' Safer told the jurors."
6. From Channel 4 News, a brief note that the jury is expected to begin deliberating soon.
7. Canada East has a brief forecast item, which relays that "Judge Amy St. Eve says she plans to read her instructions to jurors by mid-afternoon."
8. The Edmonton Sun has webbed a Canadian Press report which recaps the parts of both closing arguments delivered yesterday.
9. Rick Westhead of the Toronto Star has written a report that's entitled "Black trial nears deliberation phase." It recaps both parts as well; in shifting from Csr. Safer to Csr. Schachter, there's this note: "It's unclear, however, how long the wait will be for a verdict. The Black case is complex and has involved some 50 witnesses both for and against the four accused. Jurors are expected to deliberate on Friday for a half day and may meet for only three days the following week because of the July 4 holiday."
10. BNN aired an interview with Amanda Lang at 8:22 AM ET. She reported in it that Csr. Safer had “laid out a roadmap” for the jury, with five points claiming to show that Mr. Kipnis was not guilty. Like Julie Ruder, Csr. Safer asked the jury to use their common sense. He also reminded jurors that Mr. Kipnis is not required to take the stand. Ms. Lang expects a “pretty powerful” argument from the prosecution, which will probably contain a repeat of the cover-story theory. Eric Sussman will probably try to impugn the truthfulness of the relevant documents. The instructions to the jury will include the ostrich instruction, an explanation of intent to defraud, and some kind of definition of “honest services." They will be specific.
11. CTV NewsNet aired an interview with reporter David Akin at 8:31 AM ET. In it, he said that this morning's wrap-up is Mr. Kipnis' “last kick at the can.” If Judge St. Eve doesn’t get to her instructions by 3:30 PM CT, she will start them tomorrow. There's no reliable estimation on how long the jury will deliberate. In part, it depends upon how long the jurors stay in deliberation each day. (They’re not sequestered.) If found guilty, Conrad Black won’t be ushered off to jail between verdict and sentencing because he’s not a flight risk. If jailed, he must serve in a U.S. prison, and must serve 85% of his sentence in jail.
12. Rosie DiManno of the Star has written a report that excerpts certain schticks from Csr. Safer's closing address. She notes in it that he claimed that the prosecution got their buyers-didn't-request-it theory from Mr. Kipnis' own notes. Csr. Safer made the point that Mr. Kipnis, had he had any intent to defraud, could have destroyed the most suspicious parts of the paper trail easily.
13. CBC News has a report that focuses on both parts of the closing arguments heard in court yesterday. Near its end, it quotes a jury consultant, Wendy Grossman, who said that nothing should be read into the jurors' boredom, as it's not unusual in cases of this length and complexity.
14. Paul Waldie, as webbed by the Globe and Mail, has written a briefing about what to expect after the trial proceedings resume this morning, right up to the verdict.
15. A CityNews report also focuses on the upcoming deliberations.
16. An update on the above 7:30 AM report (item #2) has been aired on CBC Newsworld at 10:00 AM ET. Heather Hiscox was interviewed again, and she reported that Conrad Black had said “no comment” when he had arrived today in conformance with the rebuke he had received earlier from Judge St. Eve. The judge herself has been widely praised for being disciplined, as well as fair, throughout the trial. As far as the verdict is concerned, there's still no consensus forecast.
17. CTV NewsNet has also aired an updated interview with David Akin at 10:30 AM ET. Mr. Akin reported that the jury will start deliberating after the instructions are finished; they could start as early as tomorrow. They will deliberate this Friday, during a short session that will end at 1 PM CT. Mr. Akin also reported that Steve Skurka had speculated that this means a quick verdict is coming.
----------
In his blog "The Crime Sheet", Steve Skurka explains the reasoning behind a defense-oriented suspicion explaining why the prosecutors are using spin: it's to cover up a major setback for the prosecution that occurred before the trial began - the refusal on the part of Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Kipnis to plea-bargain.
1. The New York Times has webbed an abridged version of the Bloomberg report on yesterday's part of Ron Safer's argument, which opens with the theme that Mark Kipnis violating the law would be contrary to habit.
2. CBC News: Morning had an update with Heather Hiscox, aired at 7:30 AM. She said that trial is behind schedule; the jury should have been deliberating by now. Once Csr. Safer's closing argument is over with, the prosecution will make its rebuttal, in which no new evidence can be introduced. It may take a little longer than 2 hours. One the judge's instructions are finished, the jurors are expected to take a week to decide, as the case is “complicated.” The coverage in Chicago hasn't been the front-page item that it has been in Toronto; there's only been inside-paper coverage in the Tribune, the paper that's been following it most closely.
Harry Forestell, in London U.K., said that the trial's not been much of an item since the trial began, It’s been followed, but not on the front page. London’s Establishment has long “forgotten” Conrad Black, and the U.K. media has long lost interest in the lifestyle details. There’s also lots of scandals to choose from. This relative sparseness is not likely to change until the verdict is reached.
3. Peter Worthington's latest column on the trial, as webbed by the Ottawa Sun, discusses the last two closing arguments for the defense. He focuses on the one given by Csr. Safer, who he describes as the lawyer who "batted cleanup for the defence." Near the end, Mr. Worthington reports that "Safer urged the jury to be 'very, very suspicious of the government's case' -- and what the prosecution's rebuttal today will contain."
4. From Andrew Clark of the Guardian, a report on the end of Michael Schachter's closing argument for Peter Atkinson. It begins with: "Prosecutors in Conrad Black's racketeering trial are looking at the world through 'dirty windows' that give even the most innocent acts a murky sheen, defence lawyers contended yesterday."
5. The latest report by Ameet Sachdev, webbed by the Chicago Tribune, is about Csr. Safer's closing argument. In addition to summarizing his argument, it contains a few of his one-liners. One example: "'When a lawyer starts talking in Latin, watch out,' Safer told the jurors."
6. From Channel 4 News, a brief note that the jury is expected to begin deliberating soon.
7. Canada East has a brief forecast item, which relays that "Judge Amy St. Eve says she plans to read her instructions to jurors by mid-afternoon."
8. The Edmonton Sun has webbed a Canadian Press report which recaps the parts of both closing arguments delivered yesterday.
9. Rick Westhead of the Toronto Star has written a report that's entitled "Black trial nears deliberation phase." It recaps both parts as well; in shifting from Csr. Safer to Csr. Schachter, there's this note: "It's unclear, however, how long the wait will be for a verdict. The Black case is complex and has involved some 50 witnesses both for and against the four accused. Jurors are expected to deliberate on Friday for a half day and may meet for only three days the following week because of the July 4 holiday."
10. BNN aired an interview with Amanda Lang at 8:22 AM ET. She reported in it that Csr. Safer had “laid out a roadmap” for the jury, with five points claiming to show that Mr. Kipnis was not guilty. Like Julie Ruder, Csr. Safer asked the jury to use their common sense. He also reminded jurors that Mr. Kipnis is not required to take the stand. Ms. Lang expects a “pretty powerful” argument from the prosecution, which will probably contain a repeat of the cover-story theory. Eric Sussman will probably try to impugn the truthfulness of the relevant documents. The instructions to the jury will include the ostrich instruction, an explanation of intent to defraud, and some kind of definition of “honest services." They will be specific.
11. CTV NewsNet aired an interview with reporter David Akin at 8:31 AM ET. In it, he said that this morning's wrap-up is Mr. Kipnis' “last kick at the can.” If Judge St. Eve doesn’t get to her instructions by 3:30 PM CT, she will start them tomorrow. There's no reliable estimation on how long the jury will deliberate. In part, it depends upon how long the jurors stay in deliberation each day. (They’re not sequestered.) If found guilty, Conrad Black won’t be ushered off to jail between verdict and sentencing because he’s not a flight risk. If jailed, he must serve in a U.S. prison, and must serve 85% of his sentence in jail.
12. Rosie DiManno of the Star has written a report that excerpts certain schticks from Csr. Safer's closing address. She notes in it that he claimed that the prosecution got their buyers-didn't-request-it theory from Mr. Kipnis' own notes. Csr. Safer made the point that Mr. Kipnis, had he had any intent to defraud, could have destroyed the most suspicious parts of the paper trail easily.
13. CBC News has a report that focuses on both parts of the closing arguments heard in court yesterday. Near its end, it quotes a jury consultant, Wendy Grossman, who said that nothing should be read into the jurors' boredom, as it's not unusual in cases of this length and complexity.
14. Paul Waldie, as webbed by the Globe and Mail, has written a briefing about what to expect after the trial proceedings resume this morning, right up to the verdict.
15. A CityNews report also focuses on the upcoming deliberations.
16. An update on the above 7:30 AM report (item #2) has been aired on CBC Newsworld at 10:00 AM ET. Heather Hiscox was interviewed again, and she reported that Conrad Black had said “no comment” when he had arrived today in conformance with the rebuke he had received earlier from Judge St. Eve. The judge herself has been widely praised for being disciplined, as well as fair, throughout the trial. As far as the verdict is concerned, there's still no consensus forecast.
17. CTV NewsNet has also aired an updated interview with David Akin at 10:30 AM ET. Mr. Akin reported that the jury will start deliberating after the instructions are finished; they could start as early as tomorrow. They will deliberate this Friday, during a short session that will end at 1 PM CT. Mr. Akin also reported that Steve Skurka had speculated that this means a quick verdict is coming.
----------
In his blog "The Crime Sheet", Steve Skurka explains the reasoning behind a defense-oriented suspicion explaining why the prosecutors are using spin: it's to cover up a major setback for the prosecution that occurred before the trial began - the refusal on the part of Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Kipnis to plea-bargain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)