The Conrad Black Trial: Comeuppance Or Vindication?

Pending The Appeal, The Comeuppance: Sentences

2007-12-10T20:30:00.000-05:00

- Conrad Black has been sentenced to 6 1/2 years in jail, with 2 subsequent years of supervised release, and a $125,000 fine with $6.1 million in forfeiture. He must report to jail, at last word a Florida prison camp, by March 3rd.

- Peter Atkinson has been sentenced to 2 years and fined $3000, according to BNN's Kim Parlee. Steven Maich adds that Mr. Atkinson is also subject to three years of probation afterwards, and that the sentence was below the amount specified in the sentencing guidelines.

- Jack Boultbee has been sentenced to 27 months in jail and 3 years' probation, as well as $152,000 in fines and forfeitures. Sources: Steven Maich and Romina Maurino.

- Mark Kipnis is going straight to parole after 275 hours' worth of community service, with no fine at all, according to Mr. Maich. He faces six months' worth of home detention, as well as five years' worth of probation.

-----------

The announcement of the sentences brings this blog to an end for me; from now on, it'll be moribund. Thanks for reading it.

If you want to keep track of the Conrad Black trial subsequently, the following link will take you to Google News, with keywords "Conrad Black trial."

The Sentencing...The Forthcoming Appeal, And The Rest Of The Sentences

2007-12-10T16:38:00.000-05:00

On CTV NewsNet, Jacob Frenkel and Paula Todd both concurred that it would be reasonable to expect the prosecution to appeal the sentence. Csr. Frenkel noted that the prosecution could argue that the tougher 2007 sentencing guidelines should have been used.

Andrew L. Frey, one of Conrad's appeal lawyers, said that he was disappointed in the sentence, but that there are good chances for Conrad's appeal. One ground, with respect to the obstruction-of-justice charge, was that the prosecution's case for intent was quite flimsy given Conrad's overall co-operativeness with the SEC. As far as the fraud charges were concerned, the evidence indicates that Conrad acted (though for his own benefit) in good faith; he didn't know that the non-compete payment to him could be illegal because David Radler told him differently. Thus, the ostrich instruction doesn't apply, as wilful blindness implies clear sight of a crime was reasonably available. If Conrad had bad advice, then he couldn't have reasonably been expected to see any possible illegality. He added that the case against Conrad was "a weak case," and estimated that an appeal will take 8 months to a year. He also said that the bail issue, given the appeal, has yet to be settled definitively. Ms. Todd added afterwards that Csr. Frey is planning to argue that the considerations he mentioned imply that the ostrich instruction should not have been included.

Conrad's lead co-counsel, Edward Genson, was also interviewed while Csr. Frey was in the middle of his own statement. He noted that it was an interesting trial for him, complimented Judge St. Eve, and also noted that the appeal is up to the appeal lawyers. As of 2:57 PM ET, Conrad's other lead co-counsel, Eddie Greenspan, noted that Judge St. Eve took the lower side of the sentencing guidelines. He also said that that outcome, though disappointing, was far less than what it could have been. He also expressed some disappointment regarding the pre-planning element of the sentencing, saying that even the prosecution all-but gave up on it in trial. He also noted that even the prosecution implicitly conceded that the Breeden Report was largely bombast with respect to its figures, and that the 5.3 million amount implied by the verdict was miniscule by comparison. In addition, he disclaimed blame for the guilty verdict, stating that the zealouness of the prosecution, and complications which got by the jury, were impossible for him to control.

Continuing his interview, with BNN's Amanda Lang, he noted that it was not a victory if Conrad is in fact innocent. Conrad himself left with his family as of 3:10 PM ET. He didn't look that crestfallen (although his daughter Alana did.) In a statement to the press he said that "it speaks for itself." [I had a different version earlier, based upon a mishearing of mine.] That was all that he said. Later, BNN host Martin Cej said that the 2 years of post-prison release that Conrad got was supervised release.

Jeffrey Steinbech, Conrad's chief sentencing counsel, said on CTV NewsNet as of 3:18 PM ET that Conrad being put into Eglin prison camp is not a fait accompli. The decision is up to the Bureau of Prisons.

As of 3:23 PM ET, Patrick J. Fitzgerald was interviewed. He disclosed the identity of the person who supplied the shareholder-victim statement: Mr. Fox of Cardinal. (Mr. Fox dumped most of the remaining Hollinger International shares held by Cardinal close to the point where it bottomed earlier this year, although on an upspurt if I recall correctly. Mark Steyn noted that Mr. Fox showed up in person.) He also claimed that the outcome wasn't a failure in his eyes. He refused to comment about the shrinkage of the number of dollars that Conrad was culpable for, and about any appeals. He also said that the use of the ostrich instruction was, in his eyes, justified.

Ms. Lang's interview with Csr. Frey, broadcast on CTV Newsnet as of 3:41 PM ET, had him saying that the events of this day have changed nothing regarding the appeal. He repeated his contention that the use of the ostrich instruction as not warranted, and that the prosecution failed to prove intent. He also added that an inappropriate use of the instruction could prejudice the jury against the defense, and brought up the fact that the only court order extant at the time Conrad carried out the boxes was an Ontario, Canada one. He was never prosecuted for violating it, either. Csr. Frey also disclosed that Conrad is not embittered with respect to America proper, but has been disappointed by the American justice system. After that interview, as of 3:48 PM ET, Ms. Todd sugggested that the difficulty that the prosecutors had in getting access to those boxes was the fount of the obstruction-of-justice charge. She also said flatly that a Canadian court's decision regarding that order is irrelevant to the U.S. justice system (naturally, because Canada and the U.S. are different countries with two different justice systems.)

At 4:03 PM, Mr. Akin supplied a kind of closure to the case, noting that it's the last high-profile corporate-fraud case that the United States Attourney's Office is pursuing. Perhaps it's the end of this trend.

As of now, there's been no word about the sentences that the other three defendants received, although Maclean's blogger Stephen Maich has some information from his own liveblogging. One of the pieces of info there is Conrad's total score on the sentencing chart: 28. Peter Atkinson scored a 22.

A printed report on Conrad Black's sentencing, by Romina Maurino, has been webbed by 680 News. She concurs with Mr. Akin about this case being the last one of its kind on the horizon. Paul Waldie has written another webbed report for the Globe and Mail.

And, Mark Steyn is also back on the beat,

The Sentencing...The Statements and the Sentence

2007-12-10T14:38:00.000-05:00

David Akin, on CTV NewsNet, is reporting on the victim-impact statements. One was from an institutional investor, who cliamed that Conrad jerked him around and lied to him to boot. Right after, Paula Todd noted that Conrad is walking a fine line: he can't veer from "my appeal is pending" to "I was hoosegowed."

[Historical note: In the Scopes trial, John Scopes was actually found guilty. The play based on it, Inherit the Wind, implicitly made the point that the judge basically had to find him guilty, given the relevant law at the time.]

As of 1:48 PM ET, Mr. Akin speculated that Conrad's defense counsel has recommended to Conrad that he keep it short. Three minutes later, James Morton suggested that Conrad's best bet is to stress his respect for the court system while disagreeing with the outcome in his case.

Conrad Black began speaking as of 1:53 PM ET. He did in fact stress that he never maligned either the judge or the jury, nor the system. The start-off was his averment that he does not wish to re-try the case. He finished with a "very profound apology" to the shareholders, expresed regret for his conduct, and complimented the judge. His speech lasted about a minute. Ms. Todd said that "he did exactly what he should have done." The judge is now saying that Conrad had committed a serious offense, but he has no record of prior convictions. Joan Crockatt, as of 1:57 PM ET, expressed surprise at Conrad's brevity.

According to Mr. Akin, right at that point, the judge also noted that Conrad's charitable activities does mean something, including the giving from corporate funds, and that her sentence will "promote respect for the law." It must "deter others," as reported by Mr. Akin. The judge also said that Mr. Radler is at least as culpable, but is entitled to a lesser sentence because he copped a plea. His entitled Mr. Radler to a lesser sentence, but not to a "vast discrepancy."

The sentence has just been announced for Conrad: 78 months, or 6 1/2 years. The judge added that she couldn't understand how someone of his stature could have done what he did. The judge added a fine of US$125,000. She also added a forfeiture amount of $6.1 million. (The prosecution has ten days to appeal the sentence, as they may do because she could be considered to have been lenient.) In addition, Conrad faces two years of unsupervised release subsequent to the sentence. He may be deported from the U.S. as a result of that release addition, according to Mr. Akin. The prosecution wanted 25 years; the defense wanted the same sentence that David Radler got. The bail matter has not been decided on yet.

Subsequent to the announcement, Mr. Akin reported that Conrad had prepared a 5,000-word statement, but declined to give it. Judge St. Eve thanked him for his compliment. As of 2:11 PM ET, Conrad's lawyers are arguing over the forfeiture amount. Long-time trial observer Hugh Totten said that Conrad got a good deal today, and that Conrad had little to gain through making a long statement. Csr. Totten also noted that Conrad hired the same lawyer who got Frank Quattrone off from an obstruction-of-justice charge at the appeal level. As of 2:15 PM ET, Mr. Akin reported that Conrad's lawyers are arging that he rates bail, and Csr. Totten noted that their arguments are not going to take an unexpected turn. After Csr. Totten was finished, Jacob Frenkel commented that the Quattrone case was quite different: the appeal worked because of errors of procedure committed by the trial judge. None were evident in this trial.

Conrad was denied bail. He is obliged to show up at the Eglin, Florida Penitentiary as of March 3rd. It's a lower-security penitentiary. Later, Ms. Crockatt mentioned the possibility of a Presidential pardon, but noted that it would most likely come when President Bush steps down as of Jan. 2009.

Formally, according to Wikipedia, Eglin Pen is "Federal Prison Camp,... Eglin, Florida." Informally, at least according to this blog, it's one of the "Club Fed"s.

As of 2:31 PM, Ms. Todd noted that one of Conrad's appelate lawyers will be Alan Dershowitz. Csr. Frenkel subsequently noted that the ambiguities of interpretation regarding "deprivation of honest services" may eventually arrive at the doorstep of the Supreme Court of the United States.

After he was finished, Ms. Todd reported on an unexpected - perhaps unprecedented - discussion amongst Conrad's fellow Lords in the U.K.: some have suggested that Conrad be stripped of his baronial title.

The Sentence...Preliminaries

2007-12-10T13:37:00.000-05:00

According to CTV NewsNet, Conrad Black has arrived at the courthouse, with his wife and daughter. He didn't say anything as he went in. Word is, his speech to the judge will be "brief," but such a term is hard to quantify in the case of Conrad Black.

Word is, Judge St. Eve has already decided on a sentence. After Conrad Black is sentenced, the other three will be too. It's almost a certainty that they'll all appeal. Bail, though, is questionable. According to Steve Skurka, bail requires a "substantial likelihood" that the appeal will succeed. According to his sources, this case doesn't meet that burden.

Paula Todd, also on CTV NewsNet, mentions that a victim-impact statement has been filed, although it is expected that the defense will argue that they haven't had sufficient time to read it.

CTV News has a webbed report on the day's events so far. At 11:02 AM ET, Jacob Frenkel speculated that the victim-impact statement wont' have much of an effect on the sentence, because (he presumes) the judge will remember that no victims appeared at trial.

According to BNN's Amanda Lang, the victim-impact statement - handed in late - will be dealt with first. The hearing, even not taking into account Conrad's speech, may take a few hours. She concurred that the important question that will be answered is whether or not Conrad rates bail.

BNN also had old Conrad Black biographer Peter C. Newman on. Mr. Newman speculated that Conrad's previous statement against the prosecutors will go against him, as will that consent decree. What he's watching for in any expression of remorse, or of at least regret. Pat Bolland point out that Conrad could offer to pay back something to Hollinger Int'l, which Mr. Newman said would help but not much. It may be too late for that. Mr. Newman also observed that David Radler's tactics were better than Conrad's. At the end of his segment, Mr. Newman pointed out that "you can't take the law into your own hands" when comparing Conrad Black with Robert Latimer. (Interestingly, that phrase is commonly applied to lynch mobs, not to outraged defendants.)

Back at CTV News, it was reported that the loss has been set at between 5 and 10 million dollars, meaning that the top sentence will not be applicable. Also, Conrad Black has never been convicted of a previous offense. Two levels in the sentencing count may have been added for "more than minimal planning." This suggests category A, for those not convicted of a previous offesne, level 22 (if more than minimal planning is added) or 23 (if the recently-proffered statement was accepted as an influence.) It wasn't said what sentence this point in the chart corresponds to.

David Akin reported that two levels were added to the base level of 20. One was added because Conrad was operating in Canada, implying that the pre-planning consideration has not been decided on yet. Maximum sentence is 35 years.

As of 11:31 AM ET, Eric Sussman is urging Judge St. Eve apply a serious sentence, through using the now-notorious E-mails. Csr. Skurka noted that the E-mails are not relevant to the charges that the jury voted "guilty" on.

Kate Wheeler just reported, at 11:35 AM ET, that the judge has ruled against the prosecutors with respect to their claim of the level of the fraud - it's going to be between 5 and 10 million. Also, she ruled that Csr. Sussman is bringing in points that should have been brought up at trial. According to Andrew Stoltmann, the prosecution needs a big sentence to consider it a win for them. (Later, Joan Crockatt noted that the Breeden Report did a lot more damage to her as a shareholder that Conrad Black did. She then compared, perhaps tongue in cheek, Richard Breeden to Lt. William Calley.)

The prosecution did win agreement from Judge St. Eve about the pre-planning issue. This adds two ticks on the chart. Also, the judge earlier rejected a delay for the defense to respond to the proffered victim-impact statement. She did, though, agree to use the less harsh 2000 sentence guidelines. As of 11:49 AM ET, Ms. Wheeler reported that the judge remarked that the civil cases pending against Conrad Black are irrelevant to this matter, and vice-versa.

As of 11:51 AM ET, Mr. Akin reported that Judge St. Eve noted that Mr. Radler swung a lot of authority himself, and Conrad's position as CEO did not mean that he knew of everything. But, she also decided that his role was more than minor.

As of 11:56 AM: Judge St. Eve has set the sentence range as between 6 and 8 years after going through the above-mentioned chart. Conrad is facing that amount of time, and will have to serve 85% of it. Ms. Todd noted later that this 6-to-8 years is a guideline, but Csr. Frenkel noted that, say, 7 years is less serious that what the prosecution was expecting. He also said that the prosecution can appeal the sentence as being too light. He also wondered out loud if the prosectution is taking some of this personally, as they did win a conviction.

According to Mr. Akin, as of 12:04 PM, the defense is arguing that Conrad Black is more than a mere top manager, as he built the company from the ground up. They also noted that his employees liked him well, and that there was a real business - not just a "shell game." He also noted that the present Conservative government has rejected all pleas from Canadians convicted in foreign courts to serve their time in Canada under Canadian rules. That's because, as Ms. Todd noted later, they've decided that a Canadian who got due process rights in another democratic country has no pressing need for repatriation. She also noted that Conrad is no longer a Canadian citizen.

David Akin reported that, with regard to the obstruction-of-justice charge, Edward Greenspan is arguing that Conrad was just reclaiming his personal property. He returned it later. [Note: This obstruction charge is over and above the 6-to-8 years noted above.] Ms. Crockatt noted that Conrad's "defiance" is largely in place to square with his appeal.

Mr. Akin also noted, as of 12:18 PM ET, that the defense has brought in the Rick Mercer show sketch in which Conrad appeared as evidence that he has a sense of humor. Also, the usual philanthropic arguments were made - and the defense has read a letter from Sir Elton John defending Conrad's character. (Ms. Todd later speculated that Conrad's attempt to appeal to the Caandian public may have ticked off Americans.)

Another letter read in court was from Laura Ingram, a cancer survivor. Also brought to the judge's notice was Conrad's support of Jewish causes. Yet another letter was sent in by Brian Mulroney, and read in court. A further letter read in court was from someone unknown who got a ride from Conrad Black when he was feeling ill.

On CBC News, Jacquie McNish noted that it would be untoward for Conrad to make a long statement, and opined that Conrad believes that he was persecuted because he has inadequate self-questioning skills. Ms. McNish further noted that Conrad identifies with famous people who have been stricken in some way. She also believes that he'll get through prison by writing. (CBC.ca has a written report on the sentencing guideline arrived at.)

Over at CTV News, Ms. Todd noted that Conrad is insinuating blame again - seemingly, regarding the bad press he had received - and the judge has noted that he seems to be avoiding responsibility for his own actions. Like others, Ms. Todd counterpointed Conrad Black with Martha Stewart. As of 12:44 PM ET, Mr. Akin reported that the defense is stressing Conrad's "humble beginnings." Csr. Frenkel noted four minutes later that these readings are par for the course at this stage in the game.

As of 12:55 PM ET, Ms. Crockatt noted that Barbara had claimed her 'extravagance knows no bounds' remark was meant as a joke, but considers that explanation to not be that credible - that Barbara had intended at the time to come up with a striking quote at the time, and that it blew back on her. Mr. Akin made a side note that Conrad's "extraordinary life" is being made evident in those character letters.

As of 1:05 PM ET, Mr. Akin remarked that the prosecution set up a "war room" in which all of Conrad's defiant remarks to the media were posted. Csr. Sussman has just tried to bring those remarks into the sentencing hearing, claiming that Conrad has showed "open contempt" for the process and that he was nefarious enough to defraud people he knew. He also claimed that Sir Elton doesn't know Conrad all that well (suggesting that Sir Elton was asked to dash off a letter and did so as an act of charity.) Mr. Akin added later that Sir Elton's mention of Conrad's charitable nature was based upon Conrad using corporate funds to make a donation. Csr. Frenkel noted that the open-contempt point may resonate with Judge St. Eve, as she used to be a prosecutor, but she hasn't shown any signs that she is pro-prosecution.

Ms. Todd noted that the decision in the 1982 SEC matter, which she read, contained a very definite warning to Conrad to steer clear of the American justice system. Csr. Frenkel noted, though, that the 1982 matter was at the civil level. Thus, it's not relevant to this matter, but may very well be relevant to further civil proceedings. Later, Ms. Todd noted that the judge is trying to be moderate so as to avoid having her decisions overturned in an appeals court. As of 1:16 PM ET, Mr. Akin reported that the procesution is trying to debunk the picture presented by the defense. They're also hammering away at the lack-of-remorse factor.

As of 1:21 PM ET, David Morton noted that the use of the sentencing guidelines makes the sentencing decision "bullet-proof" at the appeals level (from both sides.) The court is on break as of 1:25 PM ET. During that break, Ms. Crockatt made the point that Hollinger shares were undervalued because of the "Conrad Black factor" - to be specific, because Conrad was too frenetic a deal-maker and cut too many complicated deals. The analysts have difficulty figuring out what he was up to at any point in time.

As The Sentencing Day Approaches...

2007-12-08T21:20:00.000-05:00

...the prosecution has filed a report asking the book be thrown at Conrad Black. The reason, as stated in a 680 News business report, won't surprise veteran trial-watchers that much:

"Conrad Black's lack of remorse following his conviction for fraud and obstruction of justice should be factored into next week's sentencing and possibly result in a harsher punishment, U.S. prosecutors said.

"'To this day, Black maintains his offences of conviction were "rubbish" and "nonsense," and that the criminal justice system is "essentially a substitute for a wealth-redistribution policy,""' lead prosecutor Eric Sussman said in a court filing late Monday.

"'Black insists he did "absolutely nothing" wrong and that he has been 'unjustly convicted.' Indeed, Black's conduct makes clear that he would engage in the very same conduct again if given the opportunity.'"...

----------

In fact, a later report by Romina Maurino, webbed by the Globe and Mail, confirms what the prosecution has called his "lack of remorse:"

"Conrad Black will not back down, nor will he apologize...."

The Sentencing-Delay Matter

2007-11-09T17:51:00.000-05:00

According to a CBC News report, Conrad Black's lawyers have asked for a delay of the sentencing, scheduled for November 30th, so as to have more time to reply to a prosecution pre-sentencing report. The report estimates that sentencing will take place in mid-December if such an extension is granted.

----------

It has been granted, but the extension was shorter than anticipated. The date of sentencing has been pushed back to December 10, according to a followup report posted at CBC.ca. "'I can accommodate that week,'." St. Eve said, according to a report."

Rule 29 Motions Turned Down (Except On One Count)

2007-11-05T20:54:00.001-05:00

According to this CBC News report, Judge St. Eve has dismissed a ruling for a new trial, and evidently ruled that none of the charges, except one against Mark Kipnis, should be thrown out. Mr. Kipnis got acquitted of one mail-fraud charge. The report, which was a re-webbing of an Associated Press story by Mike Robinson, didn't specify whether or not Judge St. Eve specifically ruled on the 29s, but the acquittal suggests that she did. This report by Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune suggests more strongly that the judge did in fact rule on the 29s as well as requests for re-trial. So, the only hope for Conrad and the others for re-trial or more acquittals is in the appeals they have in the works.

Juror Interview On CBC News

2007-10-23T02:41:00.001-04:00

A report from CBC News outlines what one juror said about the deliberations, and why they were contentious: she herself stuck to the belief that Conrad Black was largely not guilty. According to the juror, postal worker Jean Kelly, nine out of the twelve jurors wanted to convict Conrad on all thirteen charges, and she held them back because she couldn't find criminal intent. "As days wore on, Kelly said the jurors, who deliberated for 16 days, were furious at her and two other jurors for holding out reaching a unanimous verdict...."

She also said that the evidence she was looking for to sway the rest of the jury was contained in the footnotes of a document. "The evidence was never presented by Black's own lawyers, she said.

"After Kelly made her case, the jurors changed their position from an original vote to convict on all charges to guilty on four charges."

New Motion

2007-08-28T16:29:00.000-04:00

According to this CBC report, Conrad Black has asked for a mistrial or an acquittal. It doesn't specify which judge this was asked of. A Bloomberg report quotes some of the words therein.

A more detailed report on this new development is at CTV.ca, which also notes that the motion is being considered by Judge St. Eve herself. It has some excerpts from post-trial interviews from two jurors. Romina Maurino also has a report giving reactions from several experts, who all conclude that the motion has little chance of succeeding. Ms. Maurino's report also notes that this motion is actually one of two, the other being a motion for plain acquittal, and that each defendant has filed a similar motion. The prosecution has until September 17th to respond.

Result of the Second Custody Hearing

2007-08-15T10:52:00.000-04:00

According to CTV NewsNet, Judge St. Eve has ruled that Conrad Black cannot go back to Canada. The original conditions imposed upon him in the first custody hearing stand, as well as the freedoms he had gotten. She did stipulate that she may change her mind if Conrad can scrape up more money for bail - in fact, the reason why she let her earlier decision stand was Conrad's refusal, or inability, to put up more bail money.

The Toronto Star has webbed a brief written report on the decision that also includes the name of Conrad Black's lead appeal lawyer. A more detailed one, by Theresa Tedesco, has been webbed by the National Post. It quotes Judge St. Eve as saying in her decision: "'With no additional assets and the uncertainty of the extradition process, I am not convinced that you have met your burden.'"

Some details on the arguments used by each side are in this Bloomberg report, written by Andrew Harris, as there are in this detailed Reuters report by Andrew Stern.

Also, Susan Berger has a report on the second hearing that's been webbed by CBC News.

More news reports can be found through Google News.

The Verdict: Conrad Black and Canada

2007-07-19T22:06:00.001-04:00

The entire episode of tonight's installment of The Verdict was devoted to discussing the implications of Judge St. Eve’s decision to let Conrad stay out of jail until his sentencing, provided that he stays in the Northern District of Illinois or the state of Florida, and to revisit the amount of the bail and the return-to-Canada issue on August 1st.

The first guest was Joy Malbon, who reported on the hearing and the outcome. She noted that he didn’t get treated the same as his co-defendants, but he seems happy with the results. The asset itemization, in preparation for the August 1st hearing, may lead to Conrad being allowed to return to Canada. She also said that the prosecution had put up a real fight.

Next were Canadian immigration lawyers Richard Kurland and former prosecutor Jacob Frenkel. Csr. Kurland said that he was glad that Conrad will not be free to return to Canada at this time. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration may cancel the temporary resident permit; if she doesn’t, then a message will be indirectly sent to Judge St. Eve. Csr. Frenkel noted that the prosecution basically lost this round. He also spelled out what would happen if Conrad ducked out: a serious chase, which may not be worth it to Lord Black. Csr. Kurland added that Canada might not take the risk of offending the Americans. Csr. Frenkel added that this point makes Canada a poor risk as a flight destination; a better risk would be a country headed up by a dictator that’s not friendly with the U.S. The judge is trying to find the optimal amount that would guarantee that Conrad will show up. Part of Csr. Kurland’s observations made reference to Lord Black giving up his Canadian citizenship. He also noted that there was a material change in the circumstances, which both gives grounds for a revocation of the temporary resident permit and for a serious think-over come renewal time. (For Conrad, it’s November 27th.) Csr. Frenkel noted that Judge St. Eve has “extended a real courtesy” to Conrad by not increasing the bond today.

The next two guests, discussing the asset search launched by the government, were Paul Waldie and Al Rosen, a forensic accountant. Mr. Waldie said that we don’t know how much money Conrad has, but it probably isn’t that much. Mr. Rosen mentioned some plausible destination for any hidden assets, such as the Channel Islands, Switzerland, or the Turks and Caicos islands. Mr. Waldie mentioned two offshore companies already known, both set up for tax reasons, after saying that he wouldn’t be surprised if some hidden assets are uncovered. Conrad is likely to have set some money aside for his family, according to Mr. Waldie; Mr. Rosen concurred. He also added that there’s a time limit on such searches: in a civil case, the time-length of the search cannot extend beyond the timeframe of actions mentioned in the lawsuit. Both said that there are legal obstacles to seizing any found assets, especially for kids’ trusts. Ms. Todd then shifted the subject shifted to legal fees. With regard to Hollinger International reclaiming the fees advanced to Lord Black for his defense, Mr. Waldie noted that the company doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on as of now, because an appeal is pending. He ended by noting that there have been many a slip ‘tween the bill and the payment in cases like this. The shareholders of Hollinger Int’l are likely to get nothing back

The next segment dealt with David Radler’s attempt to rebuild his fortune. The two guests that were on to discuss it were Joan Crockett and Matthew McClearn. Ms. Crockett said that Mr. Radler is an inveterate dealmaker, and is money-driven. Mr. McClearn noted that Mr. Radler’s chief asset is his interest in Horizon Publications, and has a lot of expertise in managing small community newspapers; he also has quite a bit of money left. Ms. Crockett then said that Mr. Radler has to come back as the head of a private company, as he is banned from heading up a public company. He is very focused on cost-cutting by habit. Regarding the effect on the quality of the newspapers, Mr. McClearn noted that newspapers at this level are run on the cheap anyway. Ms. Todd then asked Ms. Crockett how much Mr. Radler cares about journalism; she replied that Mr. Radler will be guided by the market with respect to this factor. Mr. McClearn chimed in by adding that running small newspapers on the cheap is David Radler’s métier, and Ms. Crockett then added that Mr. Radler’s daughter, who owns a few newspapers herself, doesn’t.

In her closing editorial, Ms. Todd noted that the show began with the beginning of the Conrad Black trial and reviewed what’s been aired since then. She ended by noting that The Verdict will be taking a hiatus until September 4th.

[This episode of The Verdict will be broadbanded as of 10:30 pm tonight. I don't know how long it'll stay up; it might be broadbanded until the resumption of the show on September 4th.]

Update: The Custody Hearing - Not Quite Free

2007-07-19T21:39:00.000-04:00

According to a report by Romina Maurino, as webbed by 680 News, the prosecution filed a lengthy request for Conrad Black to be put in custody, as they consider him to be a "flight risk," and note that he's technically in violation of his bond conditions because he's technically in default on the mortgage of his Palm Beach home. (Not mentioned is whether or not the lender of the U.S. government would have first claim if any foreclosure proceedings were undertaken; given the general clime of U.S. law, particularly tax law, it might very well be the government.) The prosecution's filing also mentions the possibility of truculence on the part of the Canadian government with respect to an extradition hearing. A report by Barbara Schachter, as webbed by the Financial Post, adds that the prosecutors have, to support their claim with respect to the Canadian court system being refractory, an opinion from Barbara Kothe, a lawyer with the Justice Department's International Assistance Group, who claimed that the hearing would have to be a cross-border dealie conducted by a Canadian court: "'In our view, a waiver or content to extradition entered into before a foreign court would not satisfy the requirements of the Extradition Act, which requires a fresh consent or waiver before an extradition judge after extradition proceedings have been commenced,' Ms. Kothe wrote in a letter dated July 18." Paul Waldie's own report, webbed by the Globe and Mail, emphasizes this further reason supplied by Eric Sussman: "'While the government does not believe that Black poses a danger to the community, Black's conduct from the outset of these proceedings has demonstrated a lack of respect for the conditions of his release and the entire judicial process,' Mr. Sussman said in the filing."

According to a report aired by CTV NewsNet at 4:01 PM, Judge St. Eve asked if Conrad has any more money to meet an increased bond. Paula Todd took it as a significant sign that Judge St. Eve wants to tighten up the bail terms. She also reported that Conrad's defense has argued that there are no unfrozen assets available, and that prosecutors have secured an investigative team to find any hidden assets, all over the world. This investigation will also determine whether or not he has tucked away any money in his wife's and/or kids' names. Rosemary Thompson confirmed what Ms. Todd said earlier. She also interviewed Stephen Komie, who said that the inquiry into asset ownership is "standard procedure." Ms. Thompson also reported that the supposed 'mercy' shown by the prosectors has evaporated; they're now asking for 24 or 25 to 30 years. Csr. Comie supplied the 'as expected' context.

The defense has further argued, according to Ms. Thompson at about 4:30 PM ET, that Conrad Black is too known in Canada to hide out anywhere. She also noted that the hearing could take quite a while. Ms. Todd also reported that Judge St. Eve knows, through prior experience, that it can take years to extradite someone from Canada. She is also asking if an extradition would be enforcible. Ms. Thompson further reported that Csr. Sussman has argued that Conrad had violated a Canadian court order, holding it to be evidence of the flimsiness of Conrad's word. [CTV News has webbed a report on the hearing.]

A later report, also webbed by 680 News, has more detail on the additional-assets issue. Eddie Greenspan has argued that it is unlikely that an Ontario court would release assets so as to post an increase in the bond. "St. Eve said she wasn't ordering Black to disturb his settlement, adding: 'My question is: are there other assets that can be posted, even if it requires going back and asking the Canadian court's permission? I was hoping you would have some kind of good-faith proposal to post other assets.'"

In an update on CTV NewsNet aired at about 4:51 PM ET, Ms. Todd has passed on an inside report on the decision from Joy Malbon: Conrad doesn't have to go to jail, but he must stay in the Northern District of Illinois, or in Florida. He will be allowed to keep his passport. Ms. Todd commented that it was a "balanced" decision, as is typical for Judge St. Eve. In addition, as reported by Ms. Thompson from Ms. Malbon, Conrad has to make regular reports to a pre-trial officer before moving away from the Illinios northern district. The judge also said that she has insufficient assurance that Conrad will not launch an extradition fight should he move to Canada.

A further update, aired by CTV NewsNet at 5 PM, the bail hearing is over. Conrad Black is free on bail; can go to Florida but not must otherwise move from the Northern District of Illinois; has to report to a pre-trial officer [or bail officer]; and, must show up for a hearing on August 1st on his assets, which will decide whether or not he can go back to Canada. Ms. Todd reported that this gives Conrad about two weeks to get an accurate and transparent report on his finances.

Another report from Canadian Press, also webbed by 680 News, carries the same particulars. So does Mr. Waldie's latest; it also adds that "Judge Amy St. [Eve] said she wants more information on his assets and whether Lord Black can surrender his passport to Canadian Border Service Agency officials if he is eventually allowed to return to Canada."

Dan Matheson also reported on CTV NewsNet, as of 5:11 PM ET, that Conrad Black has amassed a bill of approximately $62 million in legal fees. Ms. Thompson had a quote from a post-hearing conference from Edward Genson, who called Judge St. Eve "a very reasonable woman." Conrad Black left the courtroom at 5:25 PM ET. He said nothing while exiting. Csr. Genson had little to say also, except for fencing and jollities, and Csr. Greenspan had little to say also.

Theresa Tedesco has written a report on the entire bail hearing, as webbed by the Financial Post. Another report has been webbed by CBC News, which notes that Conrad Black's passport is still in the court's possession.

----------

Mark Steyn has kept up his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, and has posted an entry on the bail hearing entitled "Limiting Options," in which he outlines why he is not satisfied with the judgement reached.

Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, continues his people watching at the courtroom.

Matthew McClearn, in the Canadian Business Black trial blog, has (as of Thurdsay afternoon) no comment after the one posted last Saturday, entitled "Requiem for the Fallen."

Finally, veteran CBC News pundit Larry Zolf has written an open letter, as webbed by the Ottawa Citizen, to Prime Minister Harper asking him to make Conrad a Canadian citizen. Mr. Zolf also identifies his political affilaition therein...

Reactions Of My Own

2007-07-18T12:30:00.000-04:00

I've written a short piece for the webzine Enter Stage Right, advocating that Conrad Black be offered Canadian citizenship by Cabinet order. A recent CBC News report indicates that there isn't a good chance of it coming to pass, though.

Another, more jaundiced, piece has been webbed by LewRockwell.com, which expresses my distaste for the general use of the "ostrich instruction." The indirect effects should be interesting to watch, though...

Final Media Roundup: News and Reactions

2007-07-16T18:09:00.000-04:00

The Conrad Black trial, as well as the trial of the other three defendants, is now over except for Conrad Black's bail hearing and the sentencing. The latter is scheduled for November 30th, and the bail hearing for Conrad Black is set for next Thursday. All four defendants were found guilty of counts 1, 6 and 7 in the indictment, and Conrad Black was also found guilty of the obstruction-of justice charge. The first three counts pertained to the non-compete payments associated with the sale of newspapers from American Publishing to Horizon Publishing.

These reports have been selected from the slew of the ones just issued, with a bias towards the regulars on the trial beat. Since the trial is over, with those two exceptions mentioned above, the entries in this blog will be slowing to a trickle. To those who have read it, I thank you all for stopping by. To the commenters, especially "nala" and those anonymous ones which I couldn't quite place, it was enjoyable reading, and mostly responding, to them.

Here is a selected list of the media reports on the outcome of the trial:

1. The indefatigable Paul Waldie, along with relative newcomer Tara Perkins, have written a report that covers the verdict; the defendants' reaction to it; the potential sentence of 35 years and a $1 million fine for Conrad Black; statements from both Eddie Greenspan and Edward Genson, which contained a public notice that Conrad will file an appeal; a declining of the opportunity to talk afterward by Conrad himself; the obervation that this case represents a "huge victory" for Eric Sussman and the others; and, a note that Conrad has waived his right to a jury assessment in the forfeiture matter. This report also contains several links to related articles, and the Globe's Conrad Black section has more.

2. The National Post has several stories on the trial, accessible from its home page today and from the Financial Post's Conrad Black trial portal page, which should be a more durable entry point. The main report, by Mary Vallis, also carries the verdict, potential sentence for Conrad, statements from both of his chief co-counsels, and the custody hearing. It also carries part of the statement made by Patrick J. Fitzgerald. There are also comments from a few observers, as well as some background.

3. Another regular, the reliable Romina Maurino, has written an extensive report entitled "Black to appeal fraud and obstruction convictions, lawyer says." Her report goes into some detail about Conrad's reaction to the verdict, and also mentions that the total amount covered by the charges for which convictions were gotten is US$3.5 million. The rest of the her report recaps the case, has more details on the first part of the bail hearing, and goes through the verdict count by count, defendant by defendant.

4. The report webbed by CTV News covers all the events of the day, and quotes Patrick J. Fitzgerald's intent to pursue 188 to 235 months' worth of sentence for Conrad Black. On the right hand side is a double-digit number of links to broadbanded video clips covering the trial. Several trial watchers, including Paula Todd, are quoted in it.

5. CBC News has a report out also. In addition to including the main parts of the story, it also mentions that the July 19th date for the custody hearing was set at the request of Csr. Greenspan. After summarizing the case, it quotes an expert who brings up the complicated nature of it.

6. The Toronto Star's special Conrad Black section has several stories and columns relating to the verdict.

7. The report by Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune notes that Conrad intends to return to Toronto to wait for the sentencing hearing, but has agreed to surrender his British passport until his custody hearing is over.

8. The report co-written by another regular, "Day One 'er" Mary Wisniewski, starts off with: "In a brutal downfall, former media tycoon Conrad Black will be going from a mansion to a prison cell as a jury on Friday convicted him of three counts of mail fraud and one count of obstruction of justice as part of a scam to rip off shareholders." It notes that none of the defendants cried when the verdict was read; neither did Barbara nor Alana.

9. The heavily-updated Bloomberg report, by Andrew Harris and Joe Schneider, has a thorough recap of both the prosecution's and defense's cases after reporting on the verdict itself.

10. Andrew Stern, the "Day One'er" from Reuters, covers the entire day's events in his report.

11. Mike Robinson is back on the trial beat for the Associated Press, as webbed by Forbes.com. His extensive report includes reactions from two experts, both veteran trial-watchers.

12. Andrew Clark of the Guardian describes Conrad looking "pale and drawn" as the verdict was read out. He also includes this description of Barbara and Alana at the same time: "Shielded by a US marshal, Black's wife, Barbara Amiel, leant over her grimacing husband with words of comfort while Black's daughter, Alana, glared straight ahead with her arms folded across her chest." An expert is quited in it, and it ends with a description of Conrad Black as he arrived at the Chicago courthouse at about 10 AM CT, or 11 AM ET.

13. A special episode of The Verdict was devoted to the Conrad Black trial. One of the first guests was Tom Bower, who appeared after a jury expert and a former prosecutor did. Peter C. Newman was another guest. It will be broadbanded at about 10:30 PM, and will be available until about 10:30 PM on July 14th.

14. Maclean's has prepared a roundup of media reactions from around the globe.

15. The Times Online has webbed James Bone's report, which mentions that Lord Black no longer has the right to sit as a Tory in the House of Lords.

16. Ms. Romino has written a capsule biography of Conrad Black which starts with the verdict and ends with a couple of commenters on his character.

17. Another profile has been written by Stephen Foley of the Independent, which presents Conrad's tragic flaw as the need to be cleverer than anyone.

18. Jacquie McNish, in the Globe, fingers Conrad Black as too proud for his own good - the type of pride that goes with blaming others when things go wrong.

19. The Guardian has webbed two opinion pieces in the "Comment Is Free" section: one contains in its end a plea for a law that would strip peers who become "serious convicts" of their titles; the second, by Kim Fletcher, says that Conrad isn't as bad as Robert Maxwell was.

20. Janet Whitman, of the New York Post, has written a report entitled "Black Bagged: Guilty on 4 Counts; Faces 35 Years In Jail."

21. Both Peter Worthington and Joe Warmington are columnists who have intermittently covered the trial. Mr. Worthington's reaction to the verdict consists of his impressions of the major participants and events in the trial. At its end, he invites the reader to decide for him- or herself whether justice has been done. Mr. Warmington begins by describing the reaction in the courtroom as the verdict was read out, including Conrad Black's, and then quotes from the statement by Patrick J. Fitzgerald. He end by describing the bail hearing, and discussing the likely sentence.

22. Susan Berger, as webbed by CBC News, has a report on the verdict reading as well.

If you would like to explore further, a Google news link, entitled "Conrad Black trial links for today," will call up quite a few.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, ends the post-sentencing-day-announcement post with this sentence: "Truly, the ways of US justice are a wonder to behold."

Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, has written an eyewitness account of the verdict being read, with a little perspective at the end of it.

The third media blogger regularly featured in this space, Matthew McClearn, has written for the Canadian Business Black trial blog a summing-up entitled "Nemesis" which recounts the initial part of Conrad Black's custody/bail hearing after the verdict was delivered.

The entry in the "Black Board" that's devoted to the verdict excerpts material found in another Post blog, "Posted," and itemizes the verdict for each defendant and each of the charges.

Finally, Steve Skurka has written a reflective summing-up entry in "The Crime Sheet" which in part details how he came to terms with his erroneous prediction of the outcome.

The Verdict Has Arrived

2007-07-13T15:51:00.000-04:00

According to a BNN news flash, a verdict has been announced in the Conrad Black trial. Here it is:

Conrad Black
Count 1: Guilty
Count 5: Not Guilty
Count 6: Guilty
Count 7: Guilty
Count 8: Not guilty
Count 9: Not guilty
Count 10: Not guilty
Count 11: Not guilty
Count 12: Not guilty.
Count 13 [Obstruction]: Guilty
Count 15: Not guilty
Count 16: Not guilty.

Jack Boultbee
Guilty on counts 1, 6 and 7. [Apologies for the earlier inaccuracy.]

Peter Atkinson:

Guilty on counts 1, 6 and 7.

Mark Kipnis:

Guilty on counts 1, 6 and 7.

A complete list of charges is here. 1 and 6 relate directly to the American Publishing sale, and Count 7 does so indirectly. CBS2 Chicago has a roundup of its own.

The Bloomberg report on the verdict has a little commentary on it, and a broader background which also recounts previous corporate-fraud convictions. It also quotes Jacob Frenkel as saying, "'The government overcame a very shaky start to win this case... They were able to pull a rabbit out of the hat.'''

On BNN, Terry Sullivan said that he believed that the security camera tape was what won the jury over. There was also a tally of the potential sentences each defendant faced; Conrad Black, 35, Peter Atkinson, 10, and the others, 15. All will go to a medium-security prison if the convictions stand up to appeal. But, Judge St. Eve has the option of concurrent sentences for the mail-and-wire-fraud charges, so the other three defendants could face only 5 years in minimum security should the convictions survive the appeal process. Conrad would still face 25 years.

Two other reports on the outcome are from Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune, who includes some background on Conrad Black himself, and from CanWest, as webbed by the Vancouver Sun, which adds some background from the case itself.

Reuters has webbed both a report on the verdict, written by Andrew Stern, and a timeline of Conrad Black's life.

Romina Maurino's report, as webbed by 680 News, begins with: "Conrad Black fixed jurors with a venomous stare as they found the former press mogul guilty on three counts of mail fraud and one of obstruction of justice Friday.... As the charges were read, Black gazed at the table in front of him, then glared at the jury with his brow furrowed in a dark frown."

The New York Times has webbed a report by Richard Siklos, whose background includes a recounting of the fate of David Radler. The Associated Press report, as webbed by the Bismarck Tribune, begins with the fate of Conrad Black and blandly describes his demeanor as "emotionless." It also mentions the sentence for the other three defendants before adding the background to the case.

Stephen Komie was interviewed on BNN, and gave a forecast on what will happen next. Sentencing is likely to take place in November or December. He gave 80% odds of the conviction being upheld on appeal in cases of this sort.

Hugh Totten gave his prediction that Conrad Black will be released on his own recognizance during an interview by CTV NewsNet. The interviewer, Rosemary Thompson, also reported that as of 1 PM ET, Csr. Sussman had argued that Conrad was a flight risk, and Edward Genson was arguing for a release on his own recognizance. Csr. Greenspan is arguing that Conrad isn't a flight risk. Csr. Totten predicted 60 to 90 days for the sentencing hearing to take place. CTV News has released a report of its own on the verdict.

A new Reuters report has been issued on the fate of Conrad Black, which contains a profile of him. It includes two quotes from Peter C. Newman, one on his likely state of mind - "'I would think he is in total shock... He really did believe he was innocent." - and the outcome: "'This is a tragedy,' Newman said of Black's conviction. 'He really did have a great brain and a great memory, and it's a tragedy for us as well as for him that he didn't live up to his potential and will end up in an American jail.'"

CTV News interviewed Mr. Newman at 1:12 PM ET, along with Joan Crockett. Mr. Newman opined that Conrad was "genuinely surprised" because he though of himself as the proprietor of the companies he owned - that he was those companies. He also said that Conrad acted arrogantly when he removed those 13 boxes. Ms. Crockett opined that the videotape euchred out the defense's evidentiary claim that Conrad had not known of the SEC order at the time. Mr. Newman added that the real punishment for Conrad Black will be treatment of him as a convicted criminal. Ms. Crockett later opined that the appeal will be "tough and dirty."

Ms. Thompson reported, as of 1:18 PM ET, that the prosecutors are moving that Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Boultbee be required to surrender their Canadian passports and live in the United States. Also reported is that Conrad is having difficulty paying the mortage for his Palm Beach home, as revealed in the defense part of his bail hearing. The jurors all declined to speak to the media.

Also on CTV NewsNet, BNN's Kim Parlee reported that the Ontario Securities Commission will be holding a hearing on Conrad Black's "egregious corporate behaviour" in November. There is no word as of yet about any rescheduling or quashing of that hearing as a result of the verdict.

Forbes.com has webbed an updated AP report, which includes a quote from Andrew Stoltmann to the effect that Conrad should feel lucky that he didn't get convicted on all of the charges.

ON CTV NewsNet, as of 1:38 PM ET, Mr. Newman passed along two related items from the United Kingdom: the U.K. government has officially said that Conrad can serve any sentence put on him in a U.K. prison; and, the British Conservative Party has repudiated him. He cannot hold himself up as a Conservative in the U.K. Right after Mr. Newman was finished commenting, Paula Todd reported that the prosecution wants a sentence of 25 to 30 years for Conrad Black. She also pointed out that Conrad didn't return the boxes immediately after receiving the SEC notice. Also, Dan Matheson noted that Peter Atkinson and Jack Boultbee do not have to surrender their passports.

After Ms. Todd had finished, Jacquie McNish said that she was surprised at the verdict, and opined that his "fatal mistake" was signing an agreement to pay Hollinger International several million dollars but backing out of it later. She also said that the U.S. Justice department will be encouraged by this verdict to pursue similar cases more aggressively.

Later, Mr. Matheson reported that making the mortage payments mentioned above was a condition of Conrad's bail; he hasn't been making those payments. He later passed on that Judge St. Eve has decided that Conrad is a flight risk.

Steve Skurka said on CTV NewsNet that, despite what other commentators have said, the prosecution has won this one; he also admitted that he had been wrong on his acquittal call. (So was I.) The judge is likely to decide upon a 10-15 year sentence, in Csr. Skurka's estimation.

Regarding the flight risk, Judge St. Eve may consider a renewed affiadavit from Conrad Black, promising to show up, to be sufficient bond to offset any risk. Ms. Lang also reported that Conrad is going to appeal, or at least is expected to do so.

At least two other defendants, Mark Kipnis and Peter Atkinson, have left the courtroom as of about 2:30 ET, or 1:20 CT. BNN broadcast a comment from Ron Safer to the effect that the jury, though conscientious as part of a fair trial, failed to differentiate between the defendants. He also indicated that Mr. Kipnis will be appealing through expressing a hope that the judge will differentiate his client from the other three defendants.

It was announced by Ms. Todd on CTV NewsNet at 2:39 PM ET that the bail hearing for Conrad Black has been adjourned for the weekend. She also opined that this wasn't a good sign for him. Ms. Thompson reported the Conrad has been asked to surrender his passport. She also reported that the identities of the jurors have been revealed, and that the sentence will be delivered on November 30th, at 2:30 PM. Mr. Matheson later read a letter from Ted Chung explaining the reason for the length of time between today and the sentencing: it gives probation officials sufficent time to gather needed background information on Conrad and the other defendants.

At about 3:25, it was announced that Conrad Black had left the courtroom, evidently in shock, saying nothing. Edward Greenspan read a statement saying that Conrad Black was acquitted of the main charges; that there will be an appeal, and that "there are viable legal grounds" for one; and, that the prosecution's recommendation for a sentence will be vigourously disputed. Edward Genson expressed surprise that it had ended, and said that "the justice system works." Unlike Csr. Greenspan, who seemed defiant, he was unemotional.

The prosecutors' press conference, with Patrick J. Fitzgerald acting as spokeman, began at about 3:35 CT. Csr. Fitzgerald said that he was “gratified” by the verdict, gave a short speech on the government protecting the shareholders, and then thanked the people who worked on the case. He claimed that he will be taking a “conservative” estimate, from Eric Sussman, regarding the requested sentence – approximately 15 ½ to 20 years – for Conrad Black, and for the forfeiture. He also complimented the jurors.

----------

Mark Steyn's been liveblogging the verdict for his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog. His frist comment on the verdict notes that the APC-related charges were the only ones to stick, other than the obstruction-of-justice charge. Those convictions, he blames Conrad Black's defense team for. He ends with: "The US Attorney's office might usefully adopt as its motto the IRA's message to Mrs Thatcher after the Brighton bombing, 'You have to be lucky every time. We only have to be lucky once.'" (Interestingly, he didn't mentioned Mark Kipnis.)

Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial, has an open thread devoted to the verdict.

Media Roundup: Gear-down

2007-07-13T10:43:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and this morning, on the Conrad Black trial have dwindled in the face of no news yesterday:

1. A background report by Ameet Sachdev and Susan Chandler, webbed by the Chicago Tribune, provides a rundown of all the charges that the defendants face.

2. The Saskatoon StarPhoenix has reprinted the Reuters report on yesterday's part of the trial.

3. A feature report by Theresa Tedesco, webbed by the National Post, discusses what a deadlocked jury and a partial verdict mean for the prosecution. It contains the interesting factoid that a conviction on only one of the 42 charges that all four defendants face can be counted as a "victory." Regarding the request for the partial verdict combined with redeliberation on the charges that the jury is deadlocked over, the report concludes: "Mr. Sussman was hedging his bets. He needed to know what the government was up against. If, as part of the partial verdict, the government has one conviction or more, he can claim victory and the rest of the deliberations won't really matter. Conversely, if the partial verdict contains acquittals, the prosecution still has a second chance if the judge sends back the jury to keep deliberating the rest of the charges."

4 A Canadian Press report, webbed by the Brandon Sun, notes that the jurors will deliberate from 9 AM CT to 1 PM CT today.

5. The Bloomberg report on yesterday's part of the trial is part of the Philadelphia Inquirer's "Business In Brief:" "The jury in the Chicago federal trial of Conrad Black, the former Hollinger International Inc. chairman, ended its 11th day of deliberating the U.S. government's fraud and racketeering case against him without reaching a verdict. The jurors left the courthouse about 4:15 local time after telling U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve they would return today, according to an e-mailed message from her chambers. The panel on July 10 told her in a note it was divided on some charges. The judge told the jury to keep trying."

6. Joe Warmington's latest column, as webbed by the London Free Press, is entitled "Tension Showing At Black Trial." It features a recap of Conrad Black's recent spats with members of the press.

7. Andrew Clark's latest piece, webbed by the Guardian, provides a look at the wait that the reporters covering the trial are going through.

8. The Globe and Mail has webbed a brief report by Paul Waldie, which says that the jurors left yesterday withough verdict or incident.

9. BNN aired a report by Amanda Lang, at 10:38 AM. She said that the jurors had included a decline of the free lunch for today in yesterday's scheduling note. Two of the women are wearing suits today. She also noted that both prosecution and defense are confident of victory.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, adds his own speculation on why the jury is still deadlocked two days subsequent to the Tuesday note, before concluding that such an exercise is largely useless.

Media Roundup: No News, More Speculation

2007-07-12T20:16:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have filled in the no-news gap (including no developments today) with speculation, commentary and related features:

1. The National Post has a brief wrapup of yesterday's deliberations, with a quote from Hugh Totten, who speculated that the jurors are "likely going over and over some of the same old ground...."

2. CTV News' report is more detailed because some background and recapping of Tuesday's deadlock have been added. Two experts are quoted in it, and there are links to nine broadband clips on the right-hand side of the webpage.

3. The Ottawa Sun has webbed a Canadian Press report that focuses upon Conrad Black flipping the bird at the media, and what it reveals about his state of mind. (Yes, there is an expert quoted in it.)

4. Also from the Ottawa Sun: a comment by Earl MacRae on that same bird flip.

5. The Globe and Mail has webbed an opinion piece by Derek de Cloet, which concludes that Conrad Black was done in through not playing it straight in the business world.

6. The Illinois Daily Herald's Burt Constable mentions Conrad Black's fate in a column about bias against the media and scandals that feed it: "Black is the perfect storm for people who hate the [mainstream] media. He’s a media guy charged with a major crime in which the victims also are media people. With 300 journalists, many of them foreign correspondents, running up expense accounts during four months of court proceedings, even the media covering the case is being forced to spend a small fortune."

7. A write-up from the New York Post's Janet Whitman reports that the only item from the jury yesterday was a note saying that the jurors will resume deliberations at 9 AM CT today.

8. Joe Warmington's latest column, as webbed by the Toronto Sun, is entitled "Blacks watch, worry and wait." He discusses Conrad's recent tension, and reveals near the end that it isn't just one or more juror(s) who need a cigarette break.

9. A recap report by Romina Maurino of CP, as webbed by the London Free Press, gives the planned time for today's deliberations: 9 AM to 4:45 PM CT.

10. A write-up by Robyn Doolittle of the Toronto Star also brings in Conrad's likely state of mind as the jury continues deliberating: "Yesterday, [despite his oft-expressed confidence], Black's poker face looked haggard. He was spotted walking the streets surrounding the court, hand-in-hand with wife Barbara Amiel, who would occasionally smile at him."

11. Both Conrad and Barbara Black have gotten one mention each in the latest column by Michael Sneed of the Chicago Sun-Times. A recent Maclean's column by her is highlighted, and a support call for him, from Julie Nixon Eisenhower, is mentioned.

12. Another CTV News report has been webbed, which includes commentary from Ted Chung, who "told CTV Newsnet anything could happen...."

13. Paul Waldie and Tara Perkins of the Globe have written a report that contains a description of the Black family as of about 4:45 PM CT yesterday. "They seemed relaxed and chatty as they got into the car but declined comment." Jack Boultbee also gets a mention.

14. The Prince George Citizen has webbed a CP report by Keith Leslie, entitled "Jury in Conrad Black fraud trial in eleventh day of deliberations." After reporting that there's neither verdict nor note from the jury this morning, it explains the 'clothing indicator'. "The sight of blue jeans on one juror prompted speculation there would not be a verdict again Thursday, because the nine women and three men know they'll be on international television when they do conclude deliberations." The rest of it is a recount of events since Tuesday afternoon and capsule description of what the trial's about.

15. BBC News has also posted a no-news-today-so-far report, with background in the rest of it.

16. Amanda Lang of BNN, at 5:23 PM ET, reported that the jurors have gone home for the day, and have left a note saying that they will deliberate from 9 AM to 1 PM ET tomorrow.

17. Right after that announcement, BNN aired an interview with jury expert Paul Lisnek. Csr. Lisnek started off by saying that Friday could be an important day, in the sense that it creates the potentiality for an expectation of a finish. The outcome is hard to predict because the necessary information, on the split number and over what charges, is needed. Nevertheless, Csr. Lisnek expects an announcement tomorrow, either of verdict or deadlock. He still doesn't sense any personality conflicts in the jury.

The defense seems to think that a partial verdict is best, but this strategy is risky. He'd recommend that the defense move to "set the entire trial aside" if the jury gets hung, even though the prosecution would put up a fight if they do. Csr. Lisnek beleives that it's an effective loss for the prosecution if there are convictions only on the perks charge.

The jurors seeing Mark Kipnis differently from the other defendants can give two perspectives to them, on the charges or, "more dangerously for the defendants," the defendants themselves. The wait for the verdict seems long because of the continuous coverage. Given the length of the trial, it hasn't been that long.

The jurors are aware of the media attention on them, so they're trying to cover up any revealing body language. That angry juror last might might very well have been angry over something personal. Csr. Lisnek moved to an ending by returning to his starting point, when he was informed of the 1 PM CT knock-off time: it tied onto his "gut feeling" about Friday being portentous. He finished up by noting that the jury also rates a free lunch if they knock off at 1 PM, but not if they end the day before lunchtime.

18. A Reuters report says the same thing as item #16 above does, except for omitting the time specification and adding a little background. So does the Canada.com report.

19. The Associated Press has issued a "Summary Box" of today's part of the deliberations.

----------

In "The Crime Sheet," Steve Skurka, as a defense lawyer, takes Conrad to task for losing his composure in the middle-finger incident.

Despite he being called away, Mark Steyn is still posting regularly in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog. His latest entry pokes fun at the Globe's attention to Conrad Black's socklessness.

Douglas Bell's top-stories post for today in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog has the latest on the tea-leaf reading. One of his selections is an entry from the Wall Street Journal Law Blog that explains what a partial verdict is.

There's also a new entry in the "Black Board," which contains an anecdote about the British and Canadian reporters getting together for cards today after several days of sticking with their fellow nationals.

The National Post's blog "Posted" reveals that the reporter that's been designated as the court contact by the entire group of them is none other than Romina Maurino.

The Verdict: The Jurors And The Blacks

2007-07-11T22:20:00.000-04:00

The first half of tonight's episode of The Verdict was devoted to the continuing wait. There were three segments devoted to the Conrad Black trial: the first featured jury expert Paul Lisnek; the second had Enron juror Dana Fernandez; and, the third, which was devoted to how the Black are holding up, had on Joan Crockett and Peter C. Newman.

In the opening segment, Csr. Lisnek speculated that the jurors have tried a start-from-scratch technique. He squared this guess with Ms. Todd pointing out the jurors' earlier request for advice by comparing them to people in school working out a difficult problem, whose teacher told them to have another crack at it. No-one knows how far they have to go. There doesn’t seem to be any real conflict in the deliberations room, just disagreement based upon key pieces of evidence. He agreed with Ms. Todd that the deadlock is most probably due to some jurors refusing to convict. It's highly unlikely that it’s eleven versus one, despite the glamour of that scenario indicating otherwise. When asked by Ms. Todd if there was lack of unanimity for each charge, he said it was “possible” but it could also be one count only, an alternative he seemed to believe was the most accurate one.

After Csr. Lisnek was finished, Ms. Todd mentioned the Enron case, which took six days of deliberation. Then, her next guest, Dana Fernandez, came on. Ms. Fernandez said that the Enron jury went through every piece of evidence for each count and trod carefully, so as to do the right thing. They were methodical, count through count. A few jurors had difficulty with two of the counts; they had to have things spelled out for them. There were some jurors with relevant depthful knowledge. She was one of them, as she works in a courtroom.

Kenneth Lay’s family smiled at the jury when they came in. But, Ms. Fernandez put it aside, as she saw the jury duty as a job that had to be done. She said that Americans do take their jury duties seriously. The Enron jurors felt no time pressure, and did the right thing because the decision would always be with them. She ended by saying that she and the other jurors still socialize together.

The third segment featured Mr. Newman and Ms. Crockett, with the general topic of how stressed both Conrad and his wife are. Mr. Newman noted that Conrad never talked in the courtroom, and that he commands the attention of the room without talking. He described Conrad Black as “exasperated,” and opined that Conrad believes that he’s “above it all.”

Ms. Crockett, on the other hand, pegged him as “resilient.” The source of his charisma, she ventured, could be visible signs of him thinking without talking. He only shows irritation occasionally; normally, according to eyewitness accounts, he's been quite patient. Barbara, though, is different. She’s more “fragile.”

Mr. Newman then described Barbara as intelligent and attractive, but with her feet not on the ground. This character trait shows in her spending behaviour. He pointed to them staying in the Ritz-Carlton, as opposed to the more modest Radisson which Conrad alone may have preferred, as evidence of that trait. Ms. Crockett disagreed with his interpretation by saying that both have a role to play.

There was further disagreement between the two about the convictability of the obstruction of justice charge. Mr. Newman pointed to the tape and the timing, while Ms. Crockett pointed out that Conrad had had no notification from the SEC at that time.

Barbara will find it harder to accept a guilty verdict, according to Mr. Newman, because she's now used to an extravagant lifestyle. Ms. Crockett replied, disagreeing with Mr. Newman regarding Barbara's habituation to wealth, that she can go back to her poverty-laced roots. When asked by Ms. Todd about how Black would adjust to prison if convicted, Ms. Crockett replied that he’s cerebral. Most likely, he'd cope through reading and writing, and would continue the fight from jail. Mr. Newman pointed out that he may not be permitted to do so in jail. Ms. Todd finished this segment by asking them both if the couple will stay together should Conrad be convicted. Mr. Newman said that Barbara probably wouldn't stay, and Ms. Crockett replied that the two are very close, so she doesn’t know.

Ms. Todd's closing editorial dealt with the wait for the end of deliberations. She said there were “troubling” signs that the jurors are having trouble with the evidence itself - that confusion, not disagreement, may be what’s causing the deadlock. The transcript asked for, a journalist (unnamed by Ms. Todd) had noted, corresponded to a time in the trial when one juror was sound asleep.

Media Roundup: Trickle To Flood

2007-07-11T19:37:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and this morning, on the Conrad Black trial have turned into a veritable flood of articles, most of which cover yesterday's events because there was no newsworthy trial event today. Below is a selection from them:

1. Eric Ferkenhoff of the New York Times has a report that quotes the deadlock note, and Judge St. Eve's words as she sent them back in: "Judge St. Eve told the panel to make 'every reasonable effort' to reach a verdict in the case..." It also mentions that Ron Safer clarified his request in court for the jury to return a partial verdict: "He later said that he was not seeking a [partial] mistrial, but was simply asking the judge to allow the jury to return the verdict they saw fit."

2. A report by FT.com's Stephanie Kirchgaessner, as webbed by MSNBC.com, summarizes the late-afternoon part of the trial, which began with the jury sending the deadlock note to the judge. When discussing Judge St. Eve sending the jury back, it notes that "In making her ruling, [she]rejected a plea by chief prosecutor Eric Sussman that jurors should be instructed that they could return a partial verdict if they chose, though she did not rule out that possibility in the future."

3. 580 CFRA has webbed a brief report on the deadlock note and the continuation of deliberations.

4. Monsters and Critics has webbed a similar brief report from United Press International.

5. A report by Dave Carpenter of the Associated Press has been webbed by the Washington Post. It adds to the FT.com report above by noting that Csr. Sussman asked for a partial verdict as part of an overall plea for the jury to keep deliberating.

6. Mary Vallis and Barbara Schecter of the National Post have co-written a report that captures all the events surrounding the deadlock note and resumption of deliberations. It also quotes Edward Genson, who predicted a verdict for today, and Hugh Totten, who speculated that "the jury is stuck on the fate of a particular co-defendant." The report also points out that "[t]he jurors appeared frustrated as they filed back into the courtroom in casual clothes. They paid close attention as St. Eve re-read the entire instruction and did not make eye contact with Black... or his three co-defendants, Jack Boultbee, Peter Atkinson and Mark Kipnis."

7. A Canadian Press report by Romina Maurino, as webbed by CBC News, fills in more details on yesterday's events, including a more complete version of Csr. Genson's quoted reaction: "'We'll either get a partial or a full verdict [today]... Generally speaking when it's partially done they don't finish the rest of it. They never go back for the rest. It's just partial and that's the end of it.'" The report also clarifies that "[a]ssistant U.S. attorney Eric Sussman asked the court to advise the jury of its options - that they can return a partial verdict and then continue to deliberate on the others or simply continue to deliberate on all counts." It's one of the few reports to recount the forfeiture hearing, held this morning, at its end.

8. Joe Warmington's latest column, as webbed by the Winnipeg Sun, starts off with a mention of Conrad Black flipping "a bird" to the reporters waiting for him yesterday afternoon, before discussing the deadlock note. He passes along a split in journalist opinion: the Canadians are leaning towards acquittal, while the Brits are leaning towards a conviction on some counts.

9. Sky News has webbed its own brief summary report on the deadlock note.

10. Paul Waldie and Tara Perkins have co-written a report for the Globe and Mail, which begins with: "Jurors in the Conrad Black trial appear to be close to ending their deliberations and some lawyers expect verdicts as early as Wednesday." The relevant statement are quoted copiously throughout it.

11. A report by Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune mentions that the part of the 75th instruction that Judge St. Eve re-read to the jury is the relevant "dynamite instruction," meant to break apart a deadlock.

12. CTV NewsNet aired a report by Rosemary Thompson at 8:31 AM ET. She said that the jurors will contine, resuming deliberations at 9 AM CT. They should send out more notes today, which will give clues to the jurors' collective state of mind. Ms. Thompson also mentioned the bird-flip, but sympathized with Conrad.

13. James Bone's report, webbed by the Times Online, mentions that Conrad Black looked "blankly" at the jury as they entered the courtroom yesterday afternoon.

14. Also webbed by the Globe is a report by Sandra Rubin on Csr. Totten's use of the trial as a strategy to get some public exposure for the firm he's with, Perkins Coie. It specifies his role at P,C: recruiting partner. It also costs the 'expense' of him spending his time as a trial expert.

15. Mary Wisniewski of the Chicago Sun-Times has written a report that starts off with: "The note sent by the Conrad Black jury Tuesday was as tough to interpret as a paragraph by James Joyce." Her report also specifies that the dynamite instruction that's already part of the 75th is the "'Silvern"' instruction. It also quotes an expert, Prof. Bernard Harcourt, as saying that the deadlock "'suggests that there is some dissension one way or another in the jury room.'"

16. The Toronto Star has webbed a report by Rick Westhead, with Robyn Doolittle, which also quotes copiously from the jury note and Judge St. Eve's response when sending the jurors back in.

17. A report from Janet Whitman of the New York Post is entitled "Jury Deadlock: Judge Orders Continued Deliberations In Black Trial." An expert, Lee Dunst, is quoted as saying that guessing at the jurors' partial verdict right now is bound to yield a forecast that's too inaccurate to be of any definite worth.

18. Joanna Walters of the Daily Express has written a report that summarizes the deadlock. Her report is the second one to mention the forfeiture hearing that took place yesterday morning.

19. BNN aired an update from Amanda Lang at 10:08 AM ET. She reported that the jurors are back, and are deliberating. Conrad Black "seems relaxed," although he must be under tremendous pressure. The American media is coming in.

20. BNN also aired an interview with Jacob Frenkel, at 11:10 AM ET. Csr. Frenkel said that no-one knows when a verdict will come down. The judge isn't pressuring the jury to come to a verdict, as of yet. If she does, then there will be a special instruction for them to do so. The judge decides on when the jury is hung; then, it's up to the government to decide whether or not to proceed with a re-indictment. If one or more defendants are convicted on one or more charges, the government may drop the charges that resulted in a hung jury. He mentioned the burden of proof, especially in relation to an upcoming SEC case which has a lower one. If there's a conviction, the judge is bound by the applicable sentencing guidelines, so the prosecution's 'batting average' isn't relevant to the sentencing. He ended by settling upon this week, but not necessarily today, as the timeframe in which a verdict will be delivered.

21. Also aired by BNN was an interview with Bill Lawler, at 1:45 PM. Csr. Lawler noted that most juries who get deadlocked eventually reach a verdict. The jurors have been forbidden to reveal the extent of the split. The judge has discretion to accept a partial verdict, as well as discretion on how many times to send the jury back: the judge can even accept a partial verdict but not for every charge, and send the jurors back to deliberating on the remainder. Csr. Lawler believes that the acceptance of a partial verdict would be favorable to the prosecution, for two reasons: one, doing so might staunch a momentum towards acquittal; two, the prosecution can retry the charges that the jury got hung on with knowledge of what worked, and what didn’t work, in trial. An appeal isn’t automatic, but notification of the right to an appeal is. Requests to stay out of jail pending appeal is routinely granted, but far from a guaranteed grant. 'Scooter' Libby had his request turned down.

22. CTV News aired an update from Rosemary Thompson at 3:01 PM ET. She reported that Conrad spent the morning in his lawyer's office, and went for a walk with his wife in the afternoon. While out, he complained about media coverage of him to a cameraman. The jury is still deliberating, and will do so until 4:45 PM CT unless they hand down a verdict or leave early. There's still an expectation that there'll be a verdict today, but no certainty.

23. A report by Romina Maurino, webbed by the Montreal West End Chronicle, contains a prediction by Csr. Frenkel for a split verdict, with a guilty verdict on some indictments and not guilty on others. He's quoted further, as is Andrew Stoltmann on the deliberation process. It ends with a brief item about Judge St. Eve turning her attention to the sentencing of Muhammad Salah. (No sentence is included in that part of the report.)

24. BNN further aired, at 4:10 PM ET, an interview with Csr. Totten. He believes that Judge St. Eve probably won't send the jury back two-three times; there's the risk of a coercion issue to consider. The jury may very well deliver an unexpected verdict. On the subject of appeal, he also said it's too early to predict the outcome of any appeal of a guilty verdict. Any appeal would probably launch right after the verdict, but is likely to take a year to be settled given the current timeframe of appeals.

25. As part of the intermittent broadcasts on the wait, BNN aired an interview with Steve Merican, an appellate lawyer, at 5:12 PM ET. He thinks the jury is “fatigued,” or tired. They're probably engaged in conflict resolution, and will give the reach for unanimity “a good try.” The deadlock could be due to emerging personality conflicts which are being smoothed out. He thinks that the request for advice from the judge is “profoundly pro-defense.” He would also advise against accepting a partial verdict if asked by the defense. After the interview was over, co-host Jacquie McNish agreed with Csr. Merican, and speculated that a partial verdict would be the worst outcome for both prosecution and defense.

26. Interviewed right afterwards, at 5:23 PM ET, was Andrew Stoltmann, a securities lawyer and regular trial watcher. Csr. Stoltmann discussed the weaknesses of the prosecution’s case. The biggest problem that the prosecutors had was the volume of evidence and length of the trial. He gave general 50-50 odds for cases of this sort to end in a hung jury after a deadlock. Adding the RICO charge was the biggest mistake the prosecutors made; the concentration of accounting details in the presentation of the evidence was another mistake. A third one may have been trying the four defendants together, because the trial had to be dragged out even further. Three or more defendants tends to make a prosecution unwieldy.

Csr. Stoltmann guessed that the jury is deadlocked on at least some of the charges relating to the non-compete payments. He also said that the prosecution had a good case, especially with the generally easy-to-prove obstruction of justice charge, but they slipped because they“overtried” it. If there is a hung jury, the best bet is the prosecution will refile charges. The prosecution has much better odds when retrying a case of this sort, as the presentation is usually much improved.

What the SEC may do is important for Mr. Black right now because he signed a consent decree in 1982, which gives the regulatory agency the right to go after him with criminal charges for any further violation of securities laws. Most likely, they’ll lay a charge if he’s convicted on one or two counts.

With regard to jailing if convicted, Csr. Stoltmann said that Conrad Black will probably not be remanded until the sentencing hearing, 3-4 months later. He finished by noting that this case would have been treated as a civil trial, unambiguously, pre-Enron.

27. At about 5:40 PM ET, Ms. Lang reported on BNN that the jury is done for the day, with no verdict reached.

28. BBC News has webbed a report that summarizes yesterday afternoon's deadlock and today's continuance of deliberations. It also has a brief background on partial verdicts.

29. At 5:56 PM ET, Ms. Lang reported on BNN that the first juror out, a man, looked either angry or unhappy.

30 An end-of-day report, webbed by 1130 News, confirms that the verdict is still out of reach.

31. The Associated Press' end-of-day report is out also, as webbed by Forbes.com.

32. Reuters' is too, although it ends with a brief recap of yesterday's deadlock.

33. A report by Mary Vallis and Barbara Shecter, as webbed by Canada.com, covers the same ground, but contains an extended quote from Csr. Totten.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has written a rundown on what verdict he would consider to be a victory for the U.S. government, and what one would not be. He also suggests that Conrad Black is easy to single out because he's "not driven by money but by strange obsolescent obsessions.... as I told Hollinger execs back then, I think it took his eye off the corporate ball at a critical time. That's one reason I believe he's innocent: At the time he was supposed to be Mister Corporate Kleptocrat, most of his energy was being devoted to suing his way into the House of Lords." A more recent entry, after informing his readers that he's going on assignment, directs his readers to another Maclean's trial blog, with entries by Steve Maich. [The first entry today by Mr. Maich was posted at 2:26 PM ET.]

Matthew McClearn, in the Canadian Business Black trial blog, starts off with a report on the waiting journalists. "The jury of the USA vs. Conrad Black et al trial in Chicago had been out nine days, and the press corps was becoming quite loopy. Scattered on the 12th floor hallway of the Everett McKinley Dirksen federal building, or occupying nearby cafes, the over-caffeinated journalists played euchre, worked on other news assignments or generally tried to occupy themselves as they awaited a verdict. Photographers and broadcast journalists lounged about in camping chairs in the first floor media pen. An anxious mood prevailed...." He returns to the same subject after recounting yesterday afternoon's events.

Also, Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, marvels at the paraphrases of "deadlock" that were used before communicating the widespread uncertainty over the outcome.

The Headline Report From CBC News

2007-07-10T23:11:00.000-04:00

CBC News' The National had its first report on the jury deadlock, which featured the correspondent Alison Smith. She reported that, after the nine days of deliberations, there was a scurry once the existence of the note was revealed. Conrad appeared calm; he had said earlier that he had anticipated all contingencies. Two experts noted how uncertain the outcome still is. Conrad Black said "no comment" in French when he left earlier today.

After Ms. Smith was done, Hugh Totten was interviewed. He has compared this stage of the trial to a game of chicken, with the judge, the jury and the lawyers risking collision with each other. It isn't known how far each can go until grounds for appeal are reached.

No-one knows what the differences in the jury room are about. It's likely that jurors will deadlock again tomorrow. If there's a partial hung jury, things will get dicey. Judge St. Eve could keep sending them in, but doing so repeatedly could be construed as “coercive:” appeals have been granted on this basis. The mounting costs may be an issue, for both sides, regarding a future trial. So, if the jury is hung on some of the charges, the prosecution may fold its hand.

----------

Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, has written an entry that has his eyewitness view of the deadlock note being read out.

The Verdict: Hanging Ambiguities

2007-07-10T22:38:00.000-04:00

The entire episode of The Verdict tonight was devoted to the Conrad Black trial. The first segment had Rosemary Thompson recounting the events since 3:30 this afternoon, and most of the rest was devoted to legal and jury analysis.

Ms. Thompson reported that the jurors returned a note saying that they had agreed on some charges but not all. They made a point of how carefully they had read “page 75” of jury instructions. The judge began speaking to the lawyers, and sent the jurors back in. They’re now home, and will deliberate starting at 9 AM CT. There will probably be a verdict tomorrow. Conrad Black himself arrived suddenly, without his family, and was “mobbed” by the press as he went in, according to Ms. Thompson. He was “light-hearted” then, but was solemn when the note was read. The prosecution seems to want a long deliberation; they're the ones who don’t want to hurry. In situations like this, the judge usually sends the jury back in.

The next segment featured Paul Lisnek, a jury expert. He concluded that this deadlock seems to be better news for the defense than for the prosecution. Deadlocks tend to result from real doubt in the room. But, jurors do change their minds after the night break. The least likely cause for it would be personality conflicts. The more likely cause would be different weighings given to the same evidence. The jury may have been looking for new advice from the judge. This is where it gets tricky for the judge, as grounds for an appeal due to improper jury influence can arise at this stage. The use of a dynamite instruction” (the Allen instruction) carries that risk. It could be brought into play if jurors retire tomorrow afternoon, but the latter's not likely. Csr. Lisnek’s call was for a verdict late tomorrow afternoon. He believes that the jury are having trouble with the primary charges, the frauds.

The third segment feauted veteran trial-observers Ted Chung and Steve Skurka. Csr. Chung said that his first reaction was a lack of surprise, as it has been a “close case.” He agreed with Csr. Lisnek that it bodes well for the defense. The Allen instruction is used fairly frequently in trials of this sort; most often, Allen instructions result in convictions.

Csr. Skurka said that the prosecution's reaction was shock; the defense was excited. He believes that the jury is stuck on the perks and other ancillary charges for Conrad Black, and has agreed to acquit on the others. Csr. Chung called that assessment “optimistic.” Csr. Skurka justified his call on this basis: a guilty verdict on the the central charges should carry the others. Csr. Chung responded that they don’t know the relative seriousness of the charges, and may be hung up on the “conceptually difficult” racketeering charge. He also noted that Ron Safer, with his get-on-with-it request, may be laying a foundation for an appeal.

After a less legal-centric segment featuring journalists Margaret Wente and Joanna Walters, a legal roundtable began. It started off with a televised quote from Edward Genson saying that it will probably be over tomorrow, and that it’s too ambiguous to call. Then, the three guests - Prof. Albert Alschuler, James Morton and Lenny Hochberg - were introduced.

Csr. Hochberg began by saying that he wasn't sure that the deadlock was good for the defense. Csr. Morton opined that the non-compete-related fraud charges were what the jurors were hung up on. It wasn't really a complete victory for the defense. Csr. Hochberg added that the jury may be daunted by the seriousness of the charges, especially the racketeering charges. Prof. Alschuler said that the jury may simply be confused at the charges' seriousness, plus the volume of detail and ambiguity of the evidence. Cases of this sort may be too complicated for a jury because of these ambiguities.

Csr. Morton disagreed with that opinion, saying that the nub of the case isn’t complicated. The prosecution's case was “compelling,” but not beyond reasonable doubt. He repeated his earlier prediction of acquittal. Csr. Hochberg sided alongside Eddie Greenspan while concurring. Prof. Alschuler added that the prosecution may have been too callow to carry the case unambiguously.

Ms. Todd counterpointed Patrick J. Fitzgerald’s reputation to Csr. Greenspan's. She then brought up the jurors' transcript request, which was denied them, and asked if the jurors are trying to make the decision without considering all of the evidence. Prof. Alschuler replied that jurors aren’t superbeings. Csr. Morton pointed out that people do use heuristics, but jurors have at least seemed well-organized. When asked by Ms. Todd if a retrial would be simpler, he said no.

Jury Deadlock

2007-07-10T19:28:00.000-04:00

[NOTE: In consonance with MSNBC's highlight policy for updates, the updated parts of any entry, except for additions at the ends either above or below the ten dashes, will be in yellow text, as well as enclosed in braces.]

BNN had two news flashes (3:47, 3:53 PM ET) which said that the jurors have passed a note to the judge saying that they have been unable to reach a verdict on all the charges. There's no agreement for any of them. They asked the judge for "clarification" of the instructions on p. 75 that deal with the procedure to reach a unanimous verdict. The lawyers are meeting, but there are no details of this special meeting as of yet.

On CTV NewsNet, reporter Rosemary Thompson said that there's a suggestion that the charges on which the jury is hopelessly deadlocked should be dropped, leaving them to decide on the others. Paula Todd says that this is a "textbook" decision. Judge will make the decision "by the book." Judge St. Eve, as of 4:02 PM ET, is calling the jury in. Ms. Todd said that the normal procedure is to send the jury back at least once: this practice often focuses the jury and facilitates a verdict. This would require a reinstruction, Ms. Todd believes.

At about 4:05-07 PM, Ms. Thompson reported that the jurors are deadlocked on some but have reached unanimity on some others. The prosecution wants to make sure a verdict is not quasi-coerced.

Judge St. Eve has sent the jury back in. There is no word as of yet on the charges the jury has agreed upon, nor whether or not they were re-instructed.

At about 4:10 PM, Steve Skurka was on. He said that this deadlock is the first evidence of the jury's thought. They were instructed to "not surrender your honest belief" while sent back to try again. The jurors didn't disclose the specific charges they were deadlocked on.

The defense wanted to rush things: they looked for partial verdict. The prosecutors "collectively looked very concerned." The jurors looked exhausted. The judge re-read the same instruction, and the jury said that it was already understood. Judge St. Eve said in reply that she may send them back only once more before declaring a mistrial. Ms. Todd was not as confident as the defense, and Csr. Skurka himself, regarding the defense chances.

There are also webbed news reports on the deadlocked jury. Paul Waldie's, webbed by the Globe and Mail, contains a quote from the jury's note: "'We have discussed and deliberated on all the evidence and we are still [unable] to reach a unanimous verdict on one or more counts.'" An Associated Press report, webbed by the International Herald Tribune, quotes a P.S. in the note: "We have read the jury instructions very carefully.'" CTV News itself has webbed a report on it.

As of 4:35 PM ET, or 3:35 PM CT, the jury is back in the deliberation room, according to Ms. Thompson. According to another note from the jury, [Mark Steyn has confirmed,] the jurors wants to deliver a partial verdict, and the judge wants them to sleep on it. There's no further news as of this time. Ms. Todd has speculated that Judge St. Eve is reviewing applicable procedure very carefully so as to avoid an appeal on any relevant grounds.

Ms. Thompson had a guest, Terry Sullivan, who said that the prosecutors are gone now, but Conrad Black and the other defendants are waiting in the courtroom. He said that the "one or more" part of the note is considered unusual; it's not a standard phrase used in notes of this kind. He also said that the defense would want a partial verdict because it would remove the defendants' uncertainty about the verdict in full. He refused to predict what the verdict will be.

A report by Bloomberg, by Andrew Harris and Joe Schneider, has also been webbed. It quotes Judge St. Eve's response to the note: "'I will not accept a partial verdict at this time.''' It also reports that, "[s]hould jurors remain deadlocked on some of the counts, St. Eve may give them a so- called Allen charge, informing them that it's their duty to reach a verdict if they can." [An updated version of the same report has a quote from Hugh Totten, who gave 50-50 odds on a partial verdict.]

On BNN, Amanda Lang had an update on the Rule 29 and associated motions from the defendants with Stephen Komie, an attorney, as of about 5:05 PM ET. If Judge St. Eve acquits any of them on that basis, in the face of a jury decision of guilty on any charge for a defendant acquitted by motion, then the prosecution will have grounds for appeal.

Reuters has a report, by Andrew Stern and a couple of others, which contains the above details, and adds an additional one: before sending the jury back, "she told those in the courtroom [out of earshot of the jury] that she has in the past sent juries back to continue talking two or three times before making a decision." It also quotes Mark Kipnis' attorney, Ron Safer, telling the court: "'from their note they've clearly been at this state for some time and it is our opinion that we accept this (partial verdict).'"

Ms. Thompson has reported, at 5:34 PM ET (4:34 PM CT), that another note has been delivered to the judge from the jury. The note said that the jury will deliberate at the regular time tomorrow: 9 AM to 4:45 PM CT. Right after her update, CTV NewsNet host Dan Matheson interviewed Jacob Frenkel, who explained that the prosecutors don't want a partial verdict because the jurors might be confused, or prejudiced, by the part they have already announced when they resume deliberations on the remaining charges. Later, Ms. Todd speculated that the jurors will most likely reach a final verdict tomorrow. She also reported at 5:50 PM ET that Peter Atkinson had just left the courtroom, suggesting that the jury has finished for the day. After she was finished, Mr. Matheson commented that Judge St. Eve may accept a partial verdict tomorrow. Conrad Black left the courtroom at 5:58 PM ET without comment.

KGAN.com has webbed an AP summary report that gives the highlights of the above events. Canada.com has webbed a full, updated version of the Reuters report, which adds background to the afternoon's events (but doesn't mention the forfeiture hearing this morning.)

A more detailed AP report, webbed by the Spokesman Review, carries a quote from Csr. Safer, to the effect that the judge should just accept a hung jury. It also says that "Lead prosecutor Eric Sussman told St. Eve that the government put the actual time of deliberations at only about seven full days and urged that the jurors continue trying to reach a verdict. He also raised the possibility of giving the jurors the option of returning a partial verdict... The judge told the attorneys the jury has paid 'incredible attention' throughout the trial. 'I do think there is some benefit to bringing the jury back into the courtroom and reinstructing them,' she said before calling the jurors to appear before her."

A CBC News report on the day's events ends with quotes from three legal experts. The first two noted that deadlock isn't uncommon in cases of this size and complexity, and the third, James Morton, said that the verdict could be announced as early as tomorrow. (As noted above, he isn't the only one forecasting a Wednesday verdict.)

----------

Mark Steyn has a running commentary on the deadlocked jury in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, with his speculations added. The two entries between 5 to 6 PM ET contain straight reports.

Another regular trial watcher, Douglas Bell, has posted an entry on the same story in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog. That entry, entitled "A Cry For Help," will be expanded as more news comes in.

If you want a copy of the jury instructions, they're in this PDF file. Instruction #75, quoted below, is:

The verdict must represent the considered judgment of each juror. Your verdict, whether it be guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous.

You should make every reasonable effort to reach a verdict. In doing so, you should consult with one another, express your own views, and listen to the opinions of your fellow jurors. Discuss your differences with an open mind. Do not hesitate to re-examine your own views and change your opinion if you come to believe it is wrong. But you should not surrender your honest beliefs about the weight or effect of evidence solely because of the opinions of your fellow jurors or for the purpose of returning a unanimous verdict.

The twelve of you should give fair and equal consideration to all the evidence and deliberate with the goal of reaching an agreement which is consistent with the individual judgment of each juror.

You are impartial judges of the facts. Your sole interest is to determine whether the government has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Media Roundup: Appearances

2007-07-10T14:57:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial include a few features as well as what trial news there is:

1. A posting in "Legalbrief" to a Times Online article, summarizing a National Post interview that Conrad gave on the weekend, introduces it with the title "Conrad Black never considered plea bargain."

2. A Canadian Press report, as webbed by CBC News, recaps yesterday's trial news after mentioning that the jury will deliberate all day today.

3. Joe Warmington's latest trial-related column, as webbed by the Edmonton Sun, has picked up on the story about the Facebook group, the "Conrad Black Fan Club." After describing what he saw there, and recounting the Frank hoax, he notes that the bulk of the members seem to be college students...before disclosing that an identity verification of the creators of it is still in progress.

4. Both Conrad and Barbara Black get a mention in Liz Smith's latest gossip column, webbed by the New York Post. She calls them "extravagantly invisible." (This same column opens up with an item of note for historians, or end-of-era seekers. Ms. Smith passes on an obituary of the no-longer-current Count Bismarck, who died a bachelor and lived as a heroin addict, lover of alcohol and all-around dissipate.)

5. The Age of Australia has webbed a copy of a Bloomberg report on the state of the deliberations, which contains a review of the charges.

6. A report webbed by 680 News says that the trial lawyers have been called into the courtroom for a meeting, "to discuss how much money the former press baron may have to repay if he is found guilty of fraud." This part of the forfeiture hearing is to discuss the precise instructions to the jury, should any be needed.

7. Mary Vallis has also written a report on the meeting, as webbed by the Financial Post. The report notes that the final decision on whether or not to let the jury handle any forfeiture issues will probably not be decided until the verdict is announced.

8. A more detailed report, also webbed by 680 News, starts off with quotes from both of Conrad Black's chief co-counsels, Eddie Greenspan and Edward Genson. It then discusses the meeting and quotes Judge St. Eve's opening words, which suggest that she wanted today's meeting to be the final one. As of now, it looks like Judge St. Eve will decide the amount of forfeiture, if any. The judge also read notes into the record, all of which have been reported on already.

9. BNN aired a report from Amanda Lang on the meeting, aired at 1:50 PM ET. She said that there was some debate over the jury instruction, and that this last meeting may not be needed, as a case that Michael Schachter submitted suggested that the jury need only determine the "nexus" between the crime and the proceeds, and need not determine the specific amount. It was made clear in the meeting that forfeiture is not the same as restitution.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his latest entry in the Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, starts off with a report about a British Muslim juror who was arrested for concealing an MP3 player in her hijab headscarf; he relates this incident to the deliberations in a somewhat curmudgeonly manner.

The Verdict: Taking So Long

2007-07-09T21:34:00.000-04:00

Tonight's episode of The Verdict had a segment dealing with the length of the deliberations. The guest was regular trial-watcher Hugh Totten.

Csr. Totten started off by comparing the wait to an old movie with expectant fathers in a waiting room. He also acknowledged, as did Ms. Todd, that the jury is being methodical; they're working through the evidence. Ms. Todd added that there has been no sign of a hung jury or “deadlock,” as Csr. Totten put it. There's been an understandable delay given the numerousness and seriousness of the charges. Csr. Totten added that the verdict form is about 30 pages, so the length of deliberations is understandable on this ground, even though he thought they’d be done by Friday as did Eddie Greenspan.

Csr. Totten speculated that the jury may find some of the non-compete agreements and associated payments “problematic,” especially the CanWest ones. The same ambiguity applies to the perks. He believes that the non-competes that contained self-dealing and the obstruction-of-justice charges were proven beyond a reasonable doubt, in his eyes. He used the slogan “not compete with himself” to describe the overlapping ownership interests that entered into those non-compete agreements.

Media Roundup: Waiting

2007-07-09T19:52:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial are focused on the continuing deliberations, with hardly any feature reports:

1. A brief Canadian Press report, as webbed by the Brandon Sun, mentions that the jurors will deliberate today from 9 AM CT to 4:45 PM CT.

2. An excerpted CP report by Romina Maurino, as webbed by the Toronto Sun, explains why it is likely that a verdict will come next week.

3. The Globe and Mail has webbed a report by Tara Perkins and Paul Waldie about a pro-Conrad online group that's genuine, unlike the one that was created by the publisher of Frank magazine; it's in Facebook. This group, called the Conrad Black Fan Club, was created by Adam Daifallah, a researcher who helped out with both of Conrad Black's recent books. One Facebook member mentioned in the report is Mike Boultbee; the report neither confirms nor denies any filial relation to Jack Boultbee. (In order to see this group, you have to either be a Facebook member or register as one.)

4. The Financial Post has webbed an excerpt of the National Post feature on Conrad Black as he is now, one written by Theresa Tedesco.

5. A CP update, webbed by 680 News, reports that "[t]he federal courthouse in downtown Chicago is buzzing with anticipation of a verdict at the Conrad Black fraud trial." As of early today, though, there's no definite sign of one; the jurors are still deliberating. [A somewhat longer version of the same story, with some added background, has been webbed by 570 News.]

6. BNN aired a report by Amanda Lang at 1:54 PM. She reported, along with other facets of the deliberations and verdict watch, about a jury-watcher who forecast an imminent verdict from interpreting an exclamation mark in Thursday's good-time-for-closing note from the jury. She also said that the jurors' checkbox form is arranged by defendant, and then count for each accused, and will dictate the procedure for reading out the verdict.

7. An end-of-day report, written by Romina Maurino and webbed by the Toronto Star, starts off with the note that the jurors have not reached a verdict yet. It contains some detail on the revised form that the jurors have to fill out, including an example of how the charges have been broken down.

8. An AP summary report, as webbed by WQAD.com, mentions that the jury has left a note with the judge saying that they will deliberate all day tomorrow.

----------

Steve Skurka, in "The Crime Sheet," suspects that the much-vaunted 95% conviction rate is too good to be true, and finds out that the official conviction rate is held by the Northern District of Illinois U.S. Attorney's office to be a misstatement.

Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, features a Guardian review of The Invincible Quest in his latest report on the top stories on the trial. He also unveils his opinion on the Globe report linked to above. (Unusually, the review itself is mixed, and has mixed in some mockery of the author.)

Some other opinions have been unveiled by Mark Steyn in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog; they tie the case into the wider context of the state of the United States justice system. After quoting a reader-sent excerpt from a two-centuries-old decision by Judge Samuel Chase on what a bad law is, he goes through each attribute and argues that the criminal prosecution of Conrad Black et. al. fits the entire (bad) bill.

Media Roundup: Eddy

2007-07-08T12:09:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have been reduced to a virtual standstill:

1. Ruth Dudley Edwards, of the Irish Independent, has written a summary of the past week's events. Largely relying upon Mark Steyn, she also mentions Susan Berger.

2. CTV News has webbed a Canadian Press forecast report entitled "Black verdict likely this week." Two lawyer trial-watchers, James Morton and Hugh Totten, are cited in support of this conclusion. Csr. Morton points to the fact that the jury has been working steadily, and has not asked for any clarification of any instruction. Csr. Totten notes that the "jurors' requests suggest they may have already worked through the evidence on 'non-competes' -- the payments Black and the others received from newspaper sales in exchange for promises not to compete with the buyers of those assets." Once finished with this part, only the ancillary charges are left.

Media Roundup: Forward-Looking Reprises

2007-07-07T17:56:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have mostly stayed focused upon the deliberations, except for one that focuses on the most watched defendant:

1. The National Post's Theresa Tedesco has written a feature on Conrad Black's life as of now, as based upon an interview with Conrad himself. It's entitled "Black: Not The Trial I Expected," and it features him discussing the fairness of the trial, his family, and hinting at what he plans to do if he's not acquitted by the jury. It also mentions that Conrad's ex-wife Joanna is down in Chicago too.

2. A brief item from the Toronto Sun starts off with noting that the jury will be deliberating Monday from 9 AM CT to 4:45 PM ET.

3. The Calgary Sun has webbed an abridged Canadian Press report that recaps yesterday's wait.

4. The Edmonton Journal has webbed an even briefer recap item, entitled "Black jury back Monday to deliberate."

5. 680 News has webbed a report whose subject is item #1. It contains a summary of the interview, with highlights.

----------

Regular trial-watcher Douglas Bell has penned a review of Woody Allen's latest book, Mere Anarchy, for the Globe and Mail. His recommendation: a worthy effort from Mr. Allen, but wait for the movie.

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, makes a supplementary point about his earlier characterization of the non-compete agreements with American Publishing, reinforcing his conclusion. Instead of arguing that the associated payments were legal because they would restrict the defendants' conduct had he resigned from Hollinger International, he argues that the payments were legal because no theft from Hollinger Int'l was ever involved. The reason behind the supplementation of his original argument was he being informed by a defense lawyer that the characterization of the APC non-compete payments in David Radler's testimony was different from what Mr. Steyn had originally wrote. The latter was based a point made by Patrick Tuite during the closing argument.

Someone who turned out not to be associated with the trial got some good news today: Donald Trump's "The Apprentice" show has been renewed for another season.

Media Roundup: Conclave

2007-07-06T20:18:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have mostly concentrated on yesterday's meeting about the forfeiture issue:

1. The Hamilton Spectator has webbed an abridged report on yesterday's forfeiture meeting, and the sixth day of jury deliberations, by Romina Maurino.

2. From the Chicago Tribune, a report on the current state of business of Sun-Times Media Group. Despite coming in with a loss of $4.8 million for this quarter, the current CEO claims that STMG is running in the black with only the costs of defending Conrad Black and the three other defendants tipping its income statement into the red. According to the article, the company has been paying 75 percent of the costs of Conrad's defense.

3. Also from the Tribune, a report by Ameet Sachdev that centres on the forfeiture hearing, mentioning that Conrad could lose up to $92 million if convicted on the major charges.

4. A report webbed by the Montreal Gazette starts off with a recap of the lawsuit filed by Hollinger Inc. against three big Canadian banks. It notes that one of the pieces of claimed evidence mentioned in the complaint was, "when the banks did become concerned in 2002, they pushed Hollinger to pay off its loans through a debt offering that left the company with obligations carrying annual interest charges around 13 per cent." The rest of the report recaps yesterday's deliberations and forfeiture hearing, and says that the jurors had requested a fix of the audio equipment last Tuesday.

5. Joe Warmington's latest column, as webbed by the Winnipeg Sun, discusses the jury-watching and says that the practice fills an important psychological need even if it has no forecast value. [An abridged version, but with the names of Eddie Greenspan's more famous clients added to it, has been webbed by the Edmonton Sun.]

6. Janet Whitman of the New York Post has a report of her own that starts off with a recap of the forfeiture hearing, and ends with a brief description of the Hollinger Inc. lawsuit. In its middle, it mentions that "[t]he jurors spent at least part of yesterday reviewing audiotapes of two annual meetings held by Hollinger International in which Black defended lavish payouts to himself and other top executives."

7. Another abridged version of the same Canadian Press report by Ms. Maurino has been webbed by the Calgary Sun. It says that the "[l]awyers for all the defendants will agree on their forfeiture instructions and preferences soon, since St. Eve said she wanted the issue to be decided before the jury comes back with a verdict."

8. Paul Waldie's own report on yesterday's forfeiture hearing, webbed by the Globe and Mail, begins with: "Conrad Black's lawyers signalled yesterday that they will block attempts by prosecutors to seize Lord Black's mansion in Palm Beach, Fla., if he is convicted." It also says that Conrad's legal team "was leaning toward the judge" to decide any forfeiture of assets as of yesterday.

9. A report by Rick Westhead of the Toronto Star says that Judge St. Eve has confirmed that the jurors had asked for a fix of the audio equipment. It also notes that the "jurors want to review an audiotape of showdowns between Black and Hollinger International Inc. investors at two shareholder meetings."

10. The continuing deliberations have made item #7 in the Boston Globe's "Business Notebook." It's entitled "Not Yet."

11. Michael Sneed's latest column in the Chicago Sun-Times mentions that Conrad Black, by not showing up at the party to commemorate the 75th anniversary of Franklin D. Roosevelt's acceptance of the Democratic Party nomination for President, had also missed some British reporters who showed up to see him.

12. 680 News has webbed a CP note that says the jury will be deliberating until 2 PM today.

13. At 11:40 AM ET, CTV NewsNet broadcasted a report by David Akin. He said that the jurors are deliberating, but there are no defendants, lawyers or reporters in the courtroom. It's been rumoured that the jurors are looking at the security-cam video of Conrad taking out the 13 boxes: there's hope that the charges for Conrad Black have all been worked through, except for the obstruction of justice and tax-fraud ones. (This rumour might actually be true.)

14. BNN aired a report from Amanda Lang at 1:32 PM ET. She said that she found out from a member of the defense team this morning that the jurors had left a note yesterday saying that they were leaving early because it "seemed like a good time to break." These words could mean that they're close to a verdict. The juror-watching is focusing on clothes now. The latest theory is that jurors dressing more formally means a verdict is near. (Ms. Lang didn't pass along any that suggested the verdict is far away.)

The names of the jurors should have released by now, but the court has demurred due to mistrial concerns. The names will be released only after the verdict is delivered, and any other juror duties are over. The Chicago Tribune is suing over this.

15. BNN's 3 PM newscast disclosed that the jurors have ended deliberations for the week without a verdict being reached. They'll continue Monday at 9 AM CT.

16. CTV NewsNet had an interview with Paula Todd, aired at 3:32 PM. After building on her point that no-one knows how long the deliberations will be, Ms. Todd said that six to eight days' worth of deliberations is normal for cases of this kind. If there's a hung jury, the foreman would tell Judge St. Eve and she would probably send them back. If they stay hung, then a mistrial will be declared. Any mistrial would be applicable on a charge-by-charge basis; a unanimous decision for any other charge by the same jury will stand. The prosecution has the option of retrying any charges that resulted in a hung jury. Ms. Todd believes that the jurors are taking the case seriously; they're being thorough. They could very well deliberate for another week.

17. WQAD.com has webbed an Associated Press summary report on the day's deliberations.

18. CBC News has a report by Romina Maurino on the same subject. It contains a summary of the day's jury-watching speculations.

19. At the end of the BNN show "Squeeze Play," Mr. Waldie reported that Monday's deliberations will take place from 9 AM to 4:45 PM, noted that a verdict doesn't seem imminent, and speculated that it will come down at or near the end of next week.

20. A BBC News report recaps the case after starting off by mentioning that the jury will be back Monday for the eighth day of deliberations. It uses the term "so-called 'non-compensation' payments" to refer to non-compete payments.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has made it to charges 2, 3 and 4 of the indictment, against Mark Kipnis, in his argument that all of the charges rate acquittals. A more recent entry finishes the series with an argument that Count 1, the "heart of the case," should be met with an acquittal because the non-compete payments are not inconsistent with industry custom and were disclosed.

Another perspective on Conrad Black has been penned by J. Richard Finlay in "Finlay ON Governance." The second part of Mr. Finlay's look at the approaching end of the Conrad Black trial holds that Conrad Black, despite his erudition which Mr. Finlay points to, has an element of "larger than life disappointment. Mr. Black was afforded every opportunity at an early age, including the alacritous assistance of the all-connected and the impressively powerful. Yet, in the end, so much seems to have been squandered." Conrad Black's tragic flaw, according to the piece, is an entitlement mentality plus too thin a skin. Mr. Black has been afflicted by hubris.

On the lighter side, the National Post blog "Posted" has a link to an entry by Mary Vallis on the "Black Board," which contains an anecdote about James Bone poking fun at the tea-leaf gazers as part of number 3 of three reasons for the trial ending soon, soon, soon: "The donuts [brought by Eric Sussman] are a significant sign,” said Times of London reporter James Bone, chief unpaid jury analyst who wanders the halls presenting his various theories... 'The donuts clearly signal it’s over. Why aren’t we getting doughnuts from Eddie Genson?'"

Rush Limbaugh, in a show transcript entitled "Just Read the First Two Paragraphs, Folks," has mentioned the coverage of the trial as an example of how to read the media: "the last three pages are going to have nothing but a summary of all the gobbledygook that's come before. The Conrad Black trial is the best example.... The story in the New York Post today had one paragraph of new information about the feds trying to already figure out what of his assets they can seize. The last paragraphs of the story are... just a rehash. So read the first two paragraphs, folks. You'll be saner, you'll know more and you'll be less angry."

Also, Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial, has continued his coverage of James Bone in his "Today's Top Stories" entry. A second one, on the wait for the verdict, contains this observation: " As deliberations move well into their second week, one senses a building anxiety, or fear, or just plain existential impatience."

The Verdict: Leaves of Tea

2007-07-05T22:34:00.000-04:00

The closing editorial of The Verdict had Ms. Todd dabbling in a little Kremlin watching, of Conrad Black. She said that he scowls and looks tense, or unhappy. She also said, though, that the length of the deliberations is impossible to predict. The estimates that are continually broadcast are backed up by theories that are little more than reading the tea leaves. She ended with a quote from a Maclean's article from Mrs. Black which refers to the horror work of Edgar Allan Poe.

----------

Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, provides a look at the forfeiture hearing from an eyewitness perspective. He mentions this interesting piece of trivia: Marc Martin, one of Conrad Black's lawyers, is also a counsel for James “Little Jimmy” Marcello. This makes for a busy lawyer.

Media Roundup: Resumption

2007-07-05T18:47:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial are returning to a closer focus on the trial itself:

1. Patricia Best has elaborated on an item, which has already received some media exposure, for her Globe and Mail column "Nobody's Business:" Conrad's no-show at a 75th annivesary party commemorating President Roosevelt's acceptance of the Democratic Party nomination. [It's also been webbed as an entry in the blog of the same name.]

2. Another report in the Globe, by Paul Waldie, details the first major executive action of the new management team running Hollinger Inc.: a lawsuit, against three Canadian big banks.

3. 570 News has webbed a brief item from the Canadian Press relating that the jurors will deliberate for a full day today, and that there will be a hearing on the forfeiture issue.

4. A report by Barbara Schachter and Theresa Tedesco, webbed by the National Post, features a public comment by Christopher Browne of Tweedy, Browne on the trial: he believes that it is likely that Conrad Black will walk, because the class bias issue has been neutralized due to there being rich people on both sides. "'If the jury was more sophisticated, they would throw him in the pokey,' concluded Mr. Browne, who has not closely monitored the 16-week trial because of health issues that required surgery and rehabilitation." (Regarding the last, he has my sympathy. Rehab demands a lot of fortitude.)

5. A post-July-4th column by Joe Warmington, as webbed by the Toronto Sun, is focused on the War on Terror, but mentions that Chicagoans still don't care all that much about Conrad Black's fate: the ones he talked to knew more about the 1919 World Series scandal than about Conrad.

6. A feature report by Mary Wisniweski of the Chicago Sun-Times assesses the chances that Conrad will come back as the CEO of Sun-Times Media Group if he's acquitted, and concludes that they're unlikely. He not only has to get the co-operation of an Ontario court to do so, as Ravelston is now in receivership, but also has to convince an understandably skeptical board to let him back in. (There's also the matter of the civil suits...)

7. Sun-Times columnist Michael Sneed's latest column contains details of another post-trial party, thrown by freelance journalist Susan Berger. [Her own report on her party is here.]

8. A BBC News report contrasts the Conrad Black trial with the now-dubbed "Family Secrets" trial of four alleged organized-crime figures.

9. A report webbed by Canada.com recounts the lawsuit launched by Hollinger Inc. against the three banks. Like the Globe report, it gives the claim in the suit: the three big banks knew that Conrad Black was up to no good, but turned a blind eye to it. (As Ms. Wisniewski discussed, it's going to be hard for Conrad to go back to his old life...)

10. CTV NewsNet has aired an interview with CTV reporter David Akin at 10:30 AM ET. Mr. Akin said that he and his colleagues are waiting for Conrad Black to arrive, for the forfeiture hearing, which should start at 10 AM CT. Conrad’s lawyers are expected to show up too. The latest gossip regarding a verdict is: if the jury sits Friday, then there will be a verdict that day.

11. An update from Mr. Akin, broadcast on CTV Newsnet at 1:06 PM ET, had him reporting that Conrad Black hasn’t shown up for the forfeiture hearing, nor have any of the other defendants; only the lawyers were there. The government seeks to hold on to the $30 million worth of assets they've already seized if Conrad is convicted of wire fraud, and wants to seize $70 million total if he's convicted of racketeering. The jurors don’t know about their role in deciding this yet; settling it will requires another mini-trial. As of the time of broadcast, the defendants’ final decision hasn’t been made. Judge St. Eve wants that decision by the end of the court day tomorrow.

12. Mr. Waldie's second report of the day, webbed by the Globe, discloses the content of the supposedly peripheral note that was sent out Tuesday: it said that the video equipment in the jury room wasn't working. The report ends by noting that the jurors haven't announced, as of the time of the report, whether or not they'll be deliberating Friday.

13. BNN aired an update from Amanda Lang at 1:53 PM ET. She noted that there were actually two jury notes on Tuesday. One was about today's deliberation schedule. The other was the one written about by Mr. Waldie, but Ms. Lang said it had called attention to something wrong with the audio machine. It indicates that the jurors were, or are, listening to the tapes from Hollinger Int'ls 2001 and '02 annual meetings that were entered into evidence. Some excerpts were introduced by the defense, but the bulk of the recordings were entered by the prosecution. Either the jurors are looking at prosecution-centred evidence, or they're still on Conrad Black. During the forfeiture hearing, Mark Kipnis' lawyer asked that the defendants be considered separately.

14. The Toronto Star's Rick Westhead, in a report on the same story as the two above, has allowed for either option: "The note indicates that the jury is either reviewing videotaped depositions by Torys lawyers Beth DeMerchant and Darren Sukokick or audio clips of Hollinger shareholder meetings [held] in 2002 and 2003 when Black came under attack from shareholders...."

15. Another report on the above, webbed by Canada.com, backs up Ms. Lang on the specific piece of equipment that had malfunctioned.

16. Another update, also broadcast on CTV NewsNet at 3:05 PM ET, had Mr. Akin saying that it isn't known as of yet whether the jurors will deliberate tomorrow. A full day may imply a verdict tomorrow. A day off pretty much implies that a verdict is far off. Mr. Akin ended with a quote from Eddie Greenspan, to the effect that the wait is somewhat surreal given the consequences for his client.

17. 680 News has webbed a report, written by Romina Maurino, that covers the entire forfeiture hearing today.

18. Bloomberg has webbed a report on the details behind the intended Hollinger Inc. lawsuit that was announced today. It seems that there was quite a tangle of conflicted interests in the actions that are mentioned in the claim. The $65.2 million being sued for was made up of two payments to Ravelston, according to the report: $48.8 million to repay a loan from Ravelston, and a new loan from Hollinger Inc. to Ravelston in the amount of $16.4 million. The banks are being sued because they collected the payments, according to the complaint allegation, "while aware its former Chairman Conrad Black was improperly siphoning money to companies that he controlled." (In a case such as this, the banks, if they lose the lawsuit, would be expected to sue Ravelston to recoup the payments because they acted only as fiduciary agent for the company that controlled Hollinger Inc.)

19. Another BNN update was aired at 5:55 PM. In it, Ms. Lang reported that the jurors left early, looking a little "grim." They will deliberate tomorrow, although Ms. Lang did not specify the hours. There are quite a few journalists waiting for the verdict as of now, although the number may diminish if the verdict is long in coming.

20. Forbes.com has webbed an Associated Press summary that starts off by noting that the sixth day of deliberations has ended with no verdict yet.

21. An updated report by Ms. Maurino, webbed by 570 News, says that the jury plans to sit on Friday from 9 AM to 2 PM CT, and that they left at 4 PM CT today without any explanation as to why. The rest of the report covers the same material as her earlier one.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has continued with his dissection of the charges. His latest entry discusses counts 8 and 9, the charges that allege mail fraud with respect to the CanWest non-compete payments. A more recent entry notes that the BBC has sent in a news team, in anticipation of the verdict.

Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, has written an entry from yesterday that features a profile of the London Times' reporter covering the trial, James Bone. He's quite the noticable character.

The "Black Board" has an entry by Mary Vallis that carries substantially the same information as item #15 above the line, but adds at its end that "Judge St. Eve indicated she will not be calling the lawyers and the four co-defendant to discuss the contents of minor notes, and will deal with them [through] telephone conference instead."

Media Roundup: More Decisions

2007-07-04T20:00:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial veer in on three areas: a possible forfeiture of defendants' assets, primarily Conrad Black's; more jury-watching; and, the July 4th Independence Day holiday.

1. The Hamilton Spectator has webbed an abridged report by Romina Maurino that starts off discussing the forfeiture decision the jury may have to make. [A slightly expanded version, webbed by the Chronicle Herald, notes that the decision has not been formally made yet.]

2. A column by Joe Warmington, as webbed by the Toronto Sun, uses Independence Day as a takeoff point for discussing the possible end of Conrad Black's. He mentions that the waiting isn't all that bad for the journalists that have to do so, and also notes that Canadian journalists believe, far more than those from other countries, that Conrad Black will be acquitted.

3. 570 News has webbed a brief Canadian Press reminder that the jury will not sit today because of the Independence Day holiday.

4. Fortune-bound Conrad Black biographer Richard Siklos gets a mention in the Globe and Mail's "Nobody's Business" column, written by Patricia Best.

5. The latest report by Paul Waldie, also webbed by the Globe, relates that the forefeiture issue will be decided in a courthouse meeting tomorrow. It also indicates that the only defendant to have made the choice between the judge and jury deciding on any forfeiture is Conrad Black, who chose to go with the jury.

6. Rosie DiManno's latest column on the trial, webbed by the Toronto Star, discusses the possibility of a hung jury.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has started a run-down of the charges, in reverse order, with reasons why the defendants should be acquitted of all of them. The first entry to this effect deals with charges 16 and 17, alleging tax fraud.

The Globe and Mail's Sarah Hampson uses the trial as a takeoff for a Canada-centric article about class bias. Unsurprisingly for the Globe, it ends with an anecdote illustrating one old Toronto establishment being eased out by the new.

Also, from the Telegraph, book reviewer Dominic Sandbrook has written an unqualified approval of Conrad Black's latest book, Invincible Quest: the Life of Richard Milhous Nixon. In the review, Mr. Sandhurst makes the point that Mr. Nixon, although of checkered character, is easy to identify with nowadays because he really was a little man at heart, and was someone whose success was hard-won - even if his tenaciousness proved to be his tragic flaw.

The Verdict: Quite The Impoundment

2007-07-03T21:39:00.001-04:00

Tonight's episode of The Verdict had a short report on the the forfeiture issue. Most of Conrad Black's assets have already been seized by the government. The guest was CTV reporter David Akin.

Mr. Akin said that the forfeiture issue arose last week and has been settled today except for the instruction to the jury. He also pointed out that jury consultants had said that minority women are more likely to convict than other women.

Conrad could lose all of his assets if convicted of racketeering, except possibly for his Toronto house. The prosecution has claimed $70 million in proceeds, and wants to seize all the shares of Hollinger, Ravelston & Conrad Black Capital Corp. that he owns. The fraud counts carry lesser proceeds estimates. If Conrad Black is convicted on one or more of the major charges, $30-70 million in seizures are possible.

Media Roundup: Lull

2007-07-03T20:28:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have shrunk in number, reflecting the paucity of news yesterday:

1. A Bloomberg report, written by Joe Schneider and Andrew Harris, notes that the jury has not yet returned a verdict and mentions the only news of the day: Conrad's lawyers filing "with St. Eve a set of jury instructions indicting their preference for the panel, and not her, to determine any forfeiture amount" late yesterday afternoon.

2. A feature report by Marc Edge in TheTyee.ca outlines a supposed design by the Asper family to acquire predominance in the Canadian print media, as interpreted from court exhibits filed by the prosecution. It also mentions a fight that brewed between Izzy Asper and Conrad Black over the National Post's treatment of Mr. Asper's son, Leonard.

3. A Canadian Press item, webbed by Canada East, mentions that the jury will sit between 9 AM and 2 PM CT today before heading home for the July 4th holiday.

4. A midday report by Romina Maurino, as webbed by 680 News, features the same item mentioned in the Bloomberg report above: Conrad Black's choice to have the jury adjudicate the forfeiture dispute. Included in the report is suggested juror instructions from the defense and prosecution. The former spells out the duty of the jurors, while the latter asks for the property, with a RICO/wire fraud justification for doing so. [An updated version of the same report has some commentary from Hugh Totten, to the effect that the same jury who finds Conrad guilty is likely to agree to forfeiture. It also notes that the instructions should be decided upon later this week.]

5. BNN aired an update interview with trial-watcher Amanda Lang at 1:35 PM ET. She said that there had been no news from the jury; no notes were sent out. Some of the reporters are beginning to jury-watch; there's even some Kremlin-watching, or attempts to guess at the verdict and deliberation time based upon jurors' interactions. As of now, though, no inferences can be drawn from, or for, the length of deliberations. The jury might deliberate on Friday; if not, it would indicate a slow verdict. Deliberations could last for two weeks more. Ms. Lang reminded the viewers that there would be a lengthy stay in prison for Conrad even if he's only convicted on one major charge, thanks to the applicable sentencing guidelines. The defendants have an automatic right of appeal.

She also mentioned the decision on forfeiture, if Conrad Black is convicted, has been assigned to the jury. There are rumors that there was a split in his defense team, and that Michael Schachter (Peter Atkinson's counsel) was the one who got the team to put the responsibility in the hands of the jury.

6. Rick Westhead of the Toronto Star has written a brief report whose subject is the first note from the jurors today. "The note's contents are not significant but do indicate the jury is not close to reaching a verdict, said a lawyer involved with the case." The report also notes that deliberations will resume Thurdsay.

7. A feature by Anne Howland, as webbed by Global National, is about an issue related to the Conrad Black trial: corporate governance. The first part of the article assesses the effect of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the U.S., and the second explores the push for a national securities regulator in Canada.

8. The Southern of Illinois has webbed an Associated Press summary report on the deliberations, and the trial itself.

9. A day's-wrap-up article webbed by CTV News discusses the forfeiture part of the case. It says that all four defendants have agreed to the jury deciding the question. Conrad Black's assets are unlikely to be forefeited if the jury finds him not guilty of racketeering.

10. An end-of-day update of her earlier report by Ms. Maurino, as webbed by CBC News, adds the information that the jury will deliberate for a full day Thursday.

11. A more in-depth version of the above report has been webbed by Canada East. It describes what assets have already been impounded from Conrad Black, specifies that the forfeiture decision will come into play if Conrad is found guilty of racketeering and/or mail fraud, and also notes that the government is seeking an asset of Peter Atkinson's, too - hence Csr. Schachter stepping in.

----------

Mark Steyn's latest entry in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog mentions that the British reporters covering the trial have opened up a betting pool on the outcome. It also mentions that Conrad's daughter Alana just celebrated her twenty-fifth birthday today.

Douglas Bell is back on the trial beat in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog. His latest post describes a full day of waiting during the deliberations, bringing forth the combination of boredom and anxiety among those waiting to be first with the news. (Evidently, this post was about yesterday's deliberations.)

The Verdict: What Jail, If Any?

2007-07-02T22:02:00.000-04:00

The opening segment of tonight's episode of The Verdict was about what kind of jail Conrad Black would end up in if convicted. The guests were Douglas McNabb and Richard Kurland.

Csr. McNabb started off by saying that it was most likely that Conrad Black, if convicted, would be sent to a "low security" prison under the purview of the Bureau of Prisons, but not minimum security due to him not being a citizen of the United States. Had Conrad been, a sentence of less than ten years' length could have put him into minimum.

Csr. Kurland added that Conrad has no citizenship rights in Canada because he renounced his citizenship. The Minister of Immigration would have to intervene on compassionate grounds – fill out a “compassion card” - for Conrad to be let in. The pending citizenship application for Conrad Black has probably been frozen until the verdict is delivered, as this is the normal procedure followed by the Immigration ministry.

Csr. McNabb then described what a low security prison is like: there are bars on doors, and there's barbed wire around the prison. Conrad may be by himself or have one to two roommates. He might be able to get paid work, at a rate of one to two dollars a day. Csr. McNabb added that, to avoid jail pending an appeal, Conrad must convince a district court judge that his appeal will probably be successful. If he can’t, then he will go to jail until the appeal is heard (and, of course, stay there if it's denied.)

Csr. Kurland ended the discussion by pointing out that the U.K. may have a jurisdiction in this matter, which Ms. Todd said will be discussed in a future episode.

----------

At the end of the episode, when discussing the clemency granted to "Scooter" Libby by President Bush today, Ms. Todd noted that the criticisms of Patrick J. Fitzgerald by the defenders of Mr. Libby are substantially the same as those made by Conrad Black supporters. She ended her "Closing Argument" editorial by noting, in the form of a rhetorical question, that Conrad Black's fate may depend upon how well he knows President Bush.

Media Roundup: Excerpts

2007-07-02T20:28:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial are largely summaries or excerpts:

1. A mention of the continuing deliberations is the third and final item in the New York Times' "The Week Ahead."

2. TheTyee.ca's "Mediacheck" highlights what they consider to be the most important story on the trial over the past month: Judge St. Eve's rebuke of Conrad Black: " Conrad Black declined to speak in his own defence at his racketeering trial after the judge explained, "I don't care what Maclean's magazine told you, you're not allowed to just answer questions about Nixon." (This link, copied verbatim from the article, is to an excerpt from The Invincible Quest: the Life of Richard Milhous Nixon, which focuses mostly on the immediate post-Watergate period. One of the interesting trivia items therein is the only sympathy call that Nixon got while sick in late 1974: it was from Mao Tse-Tung. The last except discusses his death in 1994 and legacy.)

3. The London Free Press has webbed Peter Worthington's latest trial-related column, which focuses upon the recent notification controversy. After a journalist had complained to her, Judge St. Eve had decided to stop sending out E-mail notifications of jury notes, but relented later. This is one of the few columns in the trial that has something bad to say about the judge.

4. An earlier article, about the differences between U.S. capitalism and the British variety, gets an excerpt discussion in a Russia Journal blog.

5. From ITV News, an item that starts off by mentioning that the deliberations' continuation before briefly recapping the case.

6. The trial is mentioned in the Associated Press' "Executive Morning Business Summary," as webbed by Forbes.com. The item itself is entitled "Black Case Comes Down to Troves of Docs."

7. A brief item from the Canadian Press, webbed by 680 News, is entitled "Waiting game continues for Conrad Black as jurors resume deliberations." [An updated version webbed by CTV News specifies that the jury will sit until 4:45 PM CT today, from 9 AM to 2 PM CT tomorrow, and not at all on Wednesday for the Independence Day holiday.]

8. CTV NewsNet aired a report from David Akin at 1:04 PM. According to Mr. Akin, there has been no news from the jury today; no notes have been sent out since last Friday. He has no explanation as to why. The buckle-down could be a result of juror thoroughness during the trial. The jurors haven’t announced as of yet when they’ll sit this Friday, if at all.

Mr. Akin also reported that a majority of lawyer-observers think that Conrad Black will be convicted on at least one charge.

9. Jossip has an entry on the wait for the verdict, with its usual brand of snideness added.

10. Rosemary Barton, in a report aired on CBC Newsworld at 2:08 PM ET, advanced a new theory about the reason for Judge St. Eve wanting the jurors to rely upon their notes and memories: the opposite policy would unduly slow down the deliberations, because there were so many witnesses.

11. Another update with Mr. Akin, broadcast at 3:10 PM on CTV Newsnet, had him saying that there are no notes, or anything else, from the jury today. He speculated that the verdict will possibly be delivered next week, but it's almost certain that there will be no verdict this week.

He also related that there are nine women and four minority women on the jury, and people in the category tend to convict more frequently than others in cases of this kind. People in the latter category tend to take disapproval of an opulent lifestyle into account when deciding.

12. From the BBC News, a report that sums up both the prosecution's case and the defense's. Near it end, it notes: "A verdict will mark the end of a long fall from grace for one of Britain's best-known businessmen,..."

13. A feature by Romina Maurino, webbed by the Prince George Citizen, discusses the implications of Conrad Black being found guilty for Canadian securites law: it may make easier the putting together of a national securities regulator. It also discusses other investigations in America, particularly of backdating executive options.

14. WQAD.com has webbed an AP "Summary Box" which passes on the lack of news from the jury today, and gives the schedule for tomorrow.

Critical Biography of Franklin D. Roosevelt

2007-07-02T15:48:00.000-04:00

Despite its title, "Fascism Comes To America," this multi-page web work is a critical biography of President Roosevelt. It's far from being the comprehensive and largely balanced work by Conrad Black, but it is revealing. Its author, Professor Ralph Raico, starts off by highlighting Mr. Roosevelt's patrician upbringing, his undistinguished academic record, and his early unambitiousness outside of politics. Since this is a critical biography, the author does not lace hints of Mr. Roosevelt's future greatness as a politican into this part of the biography. Instead, Prof. Raico hints at a prominent feature of the future President Roosevelt's personal style: an unusual combination of ethical slipperiness and moralizing streak. It's hard to avoid the impression that the alpha and the omega of Roosevelt's ideology was the substitution of Demon Greed for Demon Rum.

According to Prof. Raico, the forging of Roosevelt's later performance style took place during his appointment as Undersecretary of the Navy during Woodrow Wilson's administraton. At that time, Franklin Roosevelt was not only Anglophilic, but also intensely pro-war. While he was undersecretary, he developed the habit of "delivering the goods," sometimes behind the back of his boss, while breaking the rules and even laws. The latter, he bragged about right after the war's end. Anyone who has studied the characteristic kind of pragmatism Americans showed during World War 2 may recognize an echo of Roosevelt's own style.

One incident during his tenure is worth highlighting because it may very well be the anchor for the War on Drugs:

It seems that the naval base at Newport, Rhode Island, had become a center for such things as excessive drinking, prostitution, and drug dealing as well as homosexual activity. It was principally this last that disturbed a number of prominent local citizens. Roosevelt set up a secret investigating team, called "Section A – Office of the Assistant Secretary," to uncover and root out the licentious miscreants. He stipulated that there was to be no written communication regarding the case. Instead, his appointees were to report to him from time to time in person.

Since it is exceedingly difficult, in the nature of things, to obtain evidence of consensual sexual acts, the diligent inquisitors employed the default method in such cases – entrapment. Homosexuals were enticed by the use of "straight" sailors, some as young as 16, who allowed lewd acts to be performed upon them. When this became known, there was outrage in Newport. In Washington, a naval commission, headed by an old friend of Roosevelt's, was formed to probe the question. One member of Section A testified that he had, indeed, reported the relevant facts to Roosevelt; the other member was excused from testifying on account of "illness." Franklin himself vehemently denied any knowledge of the immoral methods used by the secret team he had set up – in essence, his claim was that his attitude had been "don't ask, don't tell." In the end, the naval commission exonerated him, thus saving his career.

Prof. Raico mentions in passing that Roosevelt, during Prohibition, consumed alcohol regularly; such a practice was standard amongst the uppers and near-uppers in 1920s America. One of the unanswered questions about that era is whether or not the phrase "above the law" acquired a particular heat during Prohibition.

The controversial question of whether or not President Roosevelt was a "secret Communist" is handled deftly by Prof. Raico. The professor points out that, as of the first Roosevelt Administration, the Communist Party of the United States was regularly hostile to President Roosevelt; the latter treated Communism with disdain. (This disdain may explain why there were so many closet Communists in the entire Roosevelt administration. A man who thinks that Communists are nice nut-cases is not going to see them as any kind of a threat.) As Prof. Raico makes clear, any seeming sympathy for Communism was actually chumminess with Stalin. He also notes that the policy of the U.S. government not recognizing tyrannical nations was an innovation of President Wilson in 1913, and was contrary to earlier U.S. tradition.

With regard to any Rooseveltian sympathy for fascism, Prof Raico presses the case through illustrating President Roosevelt's actions, but Franklin D. Roosevelt's character leaves certain doubts. Was the Roosevelt administration, during peacetime, somewhat fascistic merely because fascism was trendy in the early 1930s? Given the man's slipperiness, this explanation for the 1930s dabble with fascism is both consistent with that part of Franklin Roosevelt's character and is simpler. The man was usually a trend-chaser and his pronoucements were habitually vague.

Media Roundup: Inferences

2007-07-01T22:14:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial consist of two opinion pieces, a profile and three features on what legal-related wrangles may lie ahead for Conrad Black:

1. Peter Worthington's latest column, as webbed by the Ottawa Sun, begins by describing the typical courtroom routines, but then turns to a shift by Judge St. Eve over the course of the trial: taking the defense's side on objections with greater frequency as the trial wore on. He also notes the shift of the prosecution's presentation of its case.

2. A Calgary Sun columnist, Ezra Levant, starts off by noting the class of the jury and its connection to the class-envy card played repeatedly by the prosecution. He then makes the point that this case is politicized because of the political ambitions of Patrick J. Fitzgerald. According to Mr. Levant, Csr. Fitzgerald is "clearly preparing for his future campaign for governor.... Fitzgerald's hunger for a big-name conviction, combined with the unlimited budget and manpower of a government prosecutor, combined with a disintegrating jury system, combined with overreaching and complex new U.S. securities laws puts any businessman, no matter how ethical, at a disadvantage.... The charges are the criminalization of the world of business -- taking it out of the hands of shareholders and giving it to the police."

3. A profile, webbed by the Sunday Express, on the troubles Conrad Black is now facing contains this description of him: "The steely, defiant expression that the immaculately dressed multi-millionaire has shown to the world throughout the trial has finally given way to signs of stress and anxiety.... As he stepped into a cab outside the Ritz Carlton last week, he suddenly looked careworn and vulnerable." The second part of the profile contains a discussion of the other legal troubles that Conrad faces.

4. Those troubles are the subject of the first part of a feature by Andrew Stern of Reuters, entitled "Conrad Black's legal fights far from over." One mentioned early on in it is the right of Hollinger Int'l to demand recoupment of the defense costs for his criminal trial if he's found guilty. Page 2 starts off a recap of what the jurors have asked for, and the report ends with the usual expert analysis and forecasting.

5. WANDtv.com has webbed an Associated Press item which discusses the heart of the charges: the suspicious non-compete payments. "Los Angeles attorney Jeff Riffer says non-competes are common but two things stand out about them in this case: their huge size and the fact that payments went to individual executives."

6. Canada East has webbed a Canadian Press report by Romina Maurino that discusses what kind of jail Conrad Black would be sent to if convicted; the jailhouse that would get him would not be an American "Club Fed." Near its end, it notes that the most likely way he would regain his Canadian citizenship is though his wife, Barbara, who still is a citizen of Canada.

7. A more in-depth AP report has been webbed by Forbes.com. Several experts are quoted therein, and the overall theme is that the Conrad Black case is part of a broader crackdown on executives who abuse their position to the shareholders' detriment.\

8. A recap of the deliberations so far by Andrew Clark of the Guardian begins with: "The fallen press baron Conrad Black is enduring a frustrating wait to hear his fate from jurors who are displaying minimal urgency in reaching a verdict on criminal charges which could condemn him to spend his dotage in prison." It mentions the possibility of Conrad serving his sentence (if any) in the UK, but discounts the likelihood.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has a special Canada Day message for those who are sure that Canada was Pushover Nation...

Media Roundup: Dormitive Powers

2007-06-30T20:33:00.000-04:00

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."

Conrad Black Trivia, With A Presumption Of Irrelevance

2007-06-30T09:57:00.001-04:00

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.]

Media Roundup: Notes

2007-06-29T20:05:00.000-04:00

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.)

The Verdict: The Juridicial Jury

2007-06-28T21:57:00.001-04:00

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.

Another blog I'm running

2007-06-28T18:34:00.000-04:00

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.

Media Roundup: Deliberating

2007-06-28T18:12:00.000-04:00

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."

Late-Night Thought

2007-06-27T23:40:00.001-04:00

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.

CTV Nightly News' Take On the Deliberations

2007-06-27T23:18:00.001-04:00

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.]

CBC "National" Report on the End Of The Presentations

2007-06-27T23:03:00.000-04:00

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.

The Verdict: And Now, The Waiting

2007-06-27T22:08:00.001-04:00

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.

Wrapping It Up (Final Soliloquy)

2007-06-27T18:38:00.000-04:00

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.

Media Roundup: To The Deliberations

2007-06-27T09:54:00.000-04:00

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.

CBC's "The National" Report On The Day's Proceedings

2007-06-26T22:31:00.000-04:00

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 Verdict: Plumbing The Instructions

2007-06-26T21:47:00.000-04:00

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.

Wrapping It Up (The Final Duel)

2007-06-26T21:05:00.000-04:00

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.

Media Roundup: Anticipation

2007-06-26T10:44:00.000-04:00

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.

The Verdict: The Kipnis Crack

2007-06-25T22:06:00.001-04:00

Tonight's episode of The Verdict had a full segment discussing Mark Kipnis, his likely fate - acquittal - and the effect of the shrivelling of the prosecution's case against him on the entire Conrad Black trial. The two guests were Steve Skurka and Jacob Frenkel, a former prosecutor turned defense attorney.

Csr. Skurka began by noting that Ron Safer’s closing address made the prosecution look bad. Mr. Kipnis' counsel made two important points: one, there was no profit for Mr. Kipnis from any of the suspicious transactions; two, Mr. Kipnis had created the paper trail, which is behavior that is inconsistent with a guilty fraudster.

When asked by Ms. Todd why the prosecution had put Mr. Kipnis on trial at all, Csr. Frenkel answered, he's on trial because of the “kitchen-sink approach.” The prosecution aims to find the “gatekeeper,” and believed that Mr. Kipnis was that. Csr. Skurka observed that the prosecution made a “huge mistake” by including Mr. Kipnis as a defendant because Csr. Safer’s defense points do overlap to include the other defendants, including Conrad Black himself. Csr. Frenkel concurred; an outright innocent defendant makes acquittal of the others more likely.

Ms. Todd asked if this tag-team approach could backfire on Mr. Black. Csr Frenkel replied that it could. The best verdict for the prosecution in this kind of case would be a “mixed verdict,” because it shows lack of railroading by the prosecution. This point, though, does not apply to defendants being acquitted by the judge, which Mr. Kipnis may be.

The topic then shifted to the prosecution's rebuttal. Csr. Skurka offered this forecast: the prosecution may point out an inconsistency between defense characterizations of Mr. Radler and his testimony. Two defendants need his credibility impugned, but two defendants based part of their defense on his testimony (more specifically, what he did not testify to.) But, the defense has managed to put the government on trial in a sense, and the prosecutors do look mean-spirited for including Mr. Kipnis among the defendants. When asked by Ms. Todd what the prosecution should do now, Csr. Frenkel suggested that they stick to the case presented, and focus on why the prosecution has met the burden of proof. It may be a good risk to back off from Mr. Kipnis, for triage purposes.

Csr. Skurka called attention to a probable “series of objections” from defense attorneys. The prosecution has to confine itself to rebuttal, so there's much greater scope for objections than there was in the closing argument.

Ms. Todd then asked: should the defendants have been charged individually? Csr. Frenkel noted that this question is the big one for the Monday-morning-quarterback circuit. The government took a risk by lumping them together; in retrospect, they may have blown it.

Ms. Todd also got the last word in this segment. After asking Csr. Skurka what Mr. Kipnis should do if all charges against him are withdrawn, she translated his answer into: “sue!”

The Rest Of The Closes (So Far)

2007-06-25T21:28:00.000-04:00

Mark Steyn is the first observer of the Conrad Black trial to have details on Michael Schachter's finishing of the closing argument for Peter Atkinson. After noting (with complaint) that Judge St. Eve is telling the counsellors to hurry it up a little, he passes along two points made by Csr. Schachter: a supposedly fraudulent document was drafted by the uncharged Beth DeMerchant, and Mr. Atkinson's hiring of "'the best law firm in the United States to work with the best law firm in Canada'" is not exactly consistent with fraudulent intent on Mr. Atkinson's part unless the defintion of 'best law firm' has been seriously warped in recent years. Mr. Steyn also points out that the jury seems to be paying little attention to Csr. Schachter at the time he made that point that Mr. Atkinson's E-mails recommending more disclosure of the suspicious transactions is inconsistent with a criminal about to be nabbed.

Rick Westhead also has a report on the rest of Csr. Schachter's opening address, one webbed by the Toronto Star. It begins with: "The second-last day of Conrad Black's criminal trial began this morning with the government's case under renewed attack from a lawyer for one of his co-defendants." Mr. Westhead also mentions supposed juror inattention to the defense's closing arguments, which the defense lawyers have attempted to staunch by using courtroom theatrics and visual aids of their own. He describes a rebuttal chart brought in by Csr. Schachter, and how the counselor has used it.

A briefer Canadian Press report has been webbed by 680 News. It starts off with: "A defence lawyer for one of Conrad Black's co-defendants says U.S. prosecutors are 'twisting and straining' to make a case against Peter Atkinson." It further notes that Ron Safer, defense counsel for Mark Kipnis, is next.

An updated version of the same report, credited to Romina Maurino and also webbed by 680 News, has excerpts that are consistent with the Atkinson defense's overall theory, that Mr. Atkinson acted the same way an innocent man would; thus, the prosecution has failed to prove its case. In Csr. Schachter's words: "There is no real key evidence because it's hard to find incriminating evidence against an innocent person."

Mr. Steyn, amongst a burst of short entries to his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog (nine today as of 1:30 PM ET,) has reported that Csr. Schachter is done. The last part of his closing argument featured he asking Mr. Atkinson to stand up. According to Mr. Steyn, the court saw "a bald sheepish man looking a little flushed and embarrassed by his moment in the limelight." The next entry has Ron Safer's opener for Mark Kipnis: "Mr Safer pointed out [that] there's nothing sillier than a powerful argument [meaning: the prosecution's opening statement] you can't deliver on."

An updated report by Paul Waldie, webbed by the Globe and Mail, contains an anticipation of what Csr. Safer is expected to concentrate upon, but it does mention that Mr. Kipnis' counsel has started off with the testimony of David Radler: "Mr. Safer has seized on Mr. Radler's testimony as evidence that Mr. Kipnis did not participate in fraud at Hollinger."

In a BNN interview, aired at about 1:55 PM ET, Amanda Lang reported on an issue that is going to be included in the instructions to the jury: the relevance of the doctrine of "entire fairness." Put briefly, if a transaction meets this standard, then there cannot be any "deprivation of honest services."

As far as Csr. Safer's closing address is concerned, he used an argument that Ms. Lang believes to contain a mistake: since there was no intent, this case should be in civil court. She thought this line of reasoning was a mistake because it could be seen as an implicit admission of civil culpability. In the sense of protestation of innocence, it is less strong than the argument that everything was above-board. (I should note that Ms. Lang is not a lawyer.) She ended with a notice that jury deliberations could begin Wednesday, not Tuesday, as things are moving along more slowly than expected.

Ms. Maurino's report has been further updated, as webbed by 680 News, with this additional information on Csr. Safer's closing address: Mr. Kipnis has had a lifetime record of honesty; he's habituated to playing it straight. People who are that way don't jettison those habits on a lark. In addition, the testimony of the government's star witness, David Radler, has exculpated Mr. Kipnis by implication, which seals up the first point about there being no reason for Mr. Kipnis to change into a doppleganger of himself. "The prosecution, Safer charged, 'started with a conclusion ... and then worked backwards....'"

Another highlight from Mr. Steyn's coverage of the defense's closing arguments today is the highlighting by Csr. Safer that the wording of the original "Paragraph B," that part of the contracts dealing with the non-compete agreements which Julie Ruder asserted were fraudulent, was in fact "drafted... by Mr Henson, the lawyer for the buyer, CNHI. As Mr Safer said, 'Paragraph B is Henson's language, not Mark's.'"

A Bloomberg report, written by Thom Weidlich and Joe Schneider, has details on both Csr. Safer's closing argument and Csr. Schachter's. One highlight from the former's argument, quoted in the article, is Csr. Safer's emphasis to the jurors that they should not hold it against his client that he refused to testify in his own defense. "'I know you wanted to hear from him directly,' Safer told the jurors. He didn't explain the reason for the decision, noting only that the government has the power to 'point an accusing finger' at a defendant on the stand and the law requires jurors not to take into consideration the decision not to testify...."

There was another interview with Ms. Lang, aired on BNN at 6:34 PM ET. She reported that both Csr. Schachter and Csr. Safer have this in common with regard to their clients: both Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Kipnis have fewer charges against them, and both counselors have argued that there was no evidence against their respective clients. Csr. Safer pointed out that Mr. Kipnis made no money from the alleged scheme. The prosecution has admitted as much, but they did not stipulate it in their opening statement. Csr. Safer has pointed out other deviancies from the prosecution's opening address, and has listed several points upon which reasonable doubt could be based. He's not finished with his closing argument yet.

According to Ms. Lang, the prosecution's case is turning on the government's credibility regarding the interpretation of the documents introduced into evidence. Mr. Radler’s credibility wasn’t exactly stellar, but Csr. Safer has said that his testimony is irrelevant to his client's innocence because nothing Mr. Radler had said on the stand implicated Mr. Kipnis. (The same point was made by Csr. Schachter about Mr. Atkinson.) The government's best chance is building on the failure of the transactions under indictment to pass the “smell test.”

----------

An article webbed by CNews.ca has a review of the first part of Csr. Schachter's closing address, with some reaction to it from trial followers.

The Toronto Star has a satiric look at the trial itself, through a faux-Shakespearian scene where David Radler meets Conrad Black outside the courtroom. It's based on Act IV, Scene 3 of Julius Caesar.

Douglas Bell, in today's top-stories entry in the Toronto Life Conrad Black Trial blog, expresses a sense of relief now that the trial's end is imminent.

CBC News' "Inside Media" has an open forum for questions about the Conrad Black trial in preparation for an online chat question-and-answer session, scheduled for this Wednesday at 1 PM, with correspondent Mike Hornbrook.

There's also a discussion scheduled in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial, according to Douglas Bell. Tomorrow at 5 PM ET, there will be a three-way discussion amongst the pundits writing for that blog, and there is another one, open to the public, tentatively scheduled for Thurdsay.

MSN Money has webbed an FT.com feature report on the jury's upcoming deliberations, with the two contending theories that they'll be mulling over. It describes Julie Ruder's delivery of the prosecution's closing argument as deft, and carries a prediction from Hugh Totten that Conrad Black will be found guilty of some of the charges he faces.

Also, Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has gone into the "Paragraph B" matter in greater depth. He report on Csr. Safer saying to the court that the so-called 'template' arrangement, for the non-compete payments to be split 75%/25% between Hollinger International and Hollinger Inc., was being distributed by Morgan Stanley to potential buyers of Hollinger Int'l properties. Mr. Steyn also presents the rationale for the template: "[A]s Safer pointed out, there's no point signing an agreement preventing Conrad Black as chairman of Hollinger International poaching your advertising executive and moving him to Chicago if he can simply put on his Hollinger Inc hat and poach him with impunity. In the real world in which real business is conducted, an agreement that binds International but not Inc would be worthless." Mr. Steyn concludes by building on Csr. Safer's argument that the government is simply trying to criminalize the application of business judgement.

Media Roundup: Extraneous Factor

2007-06-25T08:38:00.000-04:00

There weren't very many media reports on the Conrad Black trial that were webbed overnight and this morning. Two were repeats:

1. NewsMax.com has webbed a version of a forecast report by Reuters' Andrew Stern.

2. The Hamilton Spectator has webbed an abridged version of another forecast report by Romina Maurino.

3. The latest column by Peter Worthington, as webbed by the London Free Press, is about what "reasonable doubt" is with respect to this trial. One of the reasons explaining why the outcome of the trial is so difficult to forecast, Mr. Worthington explains, is the role of Judge St. Eve's instructions to the jury, which have not been given yet. He ends with a note that criminal investigations of this sort tend to wreck the company supposedly being 'saved' by them.

4. A CP report, webbed by 570 News, relates what to expect today: the end of Michael Schachter's closing address for Peter Atkinson and the closing address for Mark Kipnis by Ron Safer.

5. Paul Waldie has written a report that sketches out what to expect today, as webbed by the Globe and Mail. Mr. Waldie discloses that Michael Schachter has told Judge St. Eve that he has two hours to go before he's finished, and that Ron Safer will probably take up the rest of the day. The prosecutorial rebuttal should be heard tomorrow morning.

6. BNN aired an interview discussing the same subject, with Amanda Lang, aired at 8:20 AM ET. According to Ms. Lang, the defense has made it clear that there are four defendants, although they have not turned on each other. The prosecution has to come back with a strong rebuttal, which includes restoring their credibility after it was chipped away in the defense's closing arguments.

Media Roundup: Close To Call

2007-06-24T22:39:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have mostly gone into Sunday-prediction mode:

1. From Ruth Dudley Edwards, as webbed by the Irish Independent, a column on the trial which begins with an extended quote from another column by the Toronto Sun's Lorrie Goldstein. Ms. Edwards states that she doesn't know which way it's going to end up either - in fact, she uses a colourful Irishism - "It would be a foolish virgin who would put her shirt on either outcome" - to say so.

2. Susan Chandler of the Chicago Tribune has written a feature on Barbara Black, with the theme that she's bearing up well under the pressure. It includes the common speculation that her personal tastes are one of the contributory factors behind her husband's business downfall, and it does point out that they were unveiled for all to see in court.

3. Peter Worthington is back. His latest column, as webbed by the Toronto Sun, picks up on a theme he's used earlier: that the prosecution, by trying the defendants in a single trial so as to portray them as 'racketeers', was like the dog in the fable grabbing at the reflection of its steak in the river. The column contains this line, worth thinking over: "The prosecution's case was all about unidentified shareholders and rhetoric about corporate stealing. Unlike Martha Stewart or Scooter Libby, no evidence was produced about Conrad lying." Also worth thinking over are the two miscarriages of justice mentioned near the end of this piece.

4. Romina Maurino's regular forecast report, as webbed by 570 News, starts off with the kicker that makes the outcome difficult to predict: the lack of a decisive piece of evidence implying guilt. Despite the ambiguity, though, one of the experts quoted in the report (Andrew Stoltmann) says: ""To sift through all the charges for four defendants I think it's going to take at least a week... If the jury comes back after a day, that's really bad news for Black and the other defendants." The other expert quoted (James Morton) believes that the jury will "'either come to the decision quite quickly or they'll be deadlocked...'"

5. Andrew Stern of Reuters has also written a forecast report, with the same indeterminate conclusion. In addition to being the first report to carry a quote from Peter Atkinson, it quotes three experts therein. "'It seems to me to be a real coin-toss, and when it's a coin-toss it favors the defense" because the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is on the prosecution, said Charles Ross, a white collar defense attorney monitoring the trial." "'From everything I've been reading, the defense has established reasonable doubt," Rebekah Poston, another white collar defense attorney said, referring to the hurdle faced by U.S. prosecutors.' The third, Hugh Totten, still says there's still a real chance that all defendants, except for Mark Kipnis, will be found guilty.

6. A mention of the trial's approaching end has made the New York Times' "The Week Ahead," in the "Executives on Trial" section. Also mentioned in that section are John Rigas, Timothy Rigas, Don Siegelman and Richard Scrushy, all of whom are to be sentenced or re-sentenced on the same day that Judge St. Eve is scheduled to give instructions to the jury.

----------

In a case related to the Conrad Black trial through his lead-co-counsel, the Toronto Star has a report on the staying of charges against Robert Topol, who was one of the co-accused in the Livent alleged fraud scandal. "In an 18-page decision, Justice Ian Nordheimer chronicled numerous blunders by prosecutors, which contributed to three years of unconstitutional delays... The biggest reason, he wrote, was Crown lawyers who continuously accommodated the schedules of Edward and Brian Greenspan, the defence team for Topol's co-accused."

Mark Steyn has joined the indeteterminacy bandwagon himself, even if he adds his standard complaints about the prosecutors. He speculates that Eric Sussman, should he give the rebuttal, will fall back on already-established habit and slip in new accusations.

Finally, the New York Times has a feature report, to which Richard Siklos contributed, on Conrad Black's nemesis, Rupert Murdoch; he's currently pursuing the Wall Street Journal. It describes him as an eighteenth-century figure who is comfortable and even sagacious when operating in a regulated environment. Like many businesspeople of this stripe, he has faced legislative vindictiveness when he crossed the line; like many businesspeople of his stripe, he has a resilience that enables him to bounce back from such defeats. (In that part of the business world, it's largely a game.) The basic panolpy of Mr. Murdoch's rule-bending techniques, especially his ease at securing "easements," are described in this report. The more original tricks resemble product placements.

(If Conrad Black gets convicted, then Mr. Murdoch will be the mogul to watch, and the star on the rise. Few people are going to confuse Rupert Murdoch with Conrad Black.)

Prisoner’s Dilemmas and White-Collar Prisoners, Part 2

2007-06-24T10:47:00.000-04:00

Despite its compellingness, there seemed to be something wrong with the Prisoner’s Dilemma (PD) game as a tool for predicting the behavior of real people. In the real world, co-operativeness is far more common than the initial models predicted.

It’s possible to account for this mismatch by positing a “social instinct,” which people follow despite the cost of them doing so. If this explanation were accurate, then there can be no accounting for the costs of co-operation under the prisoner’s dilemma, nor economizing for it. People just act co-operatively without regard to cost, so economics can have nothing to say beyond noting what the costs are.

Recently, though, another explanation has arisen from the studies of the game itself, though analyzing what is called the “iterated prisoner’s dilemma,” where the PD game is played multiple times against the same opponent(s). What makes this variant of the game different from the one-shot variety is the possibility for a co-operator to seek revenge against someone who defected against him/her earlier. Numerous studies have shown that, when payback is allowed for in this way, the optimal strategy more closely resembles everyday life.

According to the Wikipedia article on the subject, game theorist Robert Axelrod has identified four criteria for an optimal strategy in an iterated prisoner’s dilemma game: niceness, or initially giving a stranger the benefit of the doubt; retaliation, or making sure a defection is paid back in kind the next time ‘round; forgiveness, or the refusal to hold grudges once the payback has been administered; and, non-enviousness, or playing by the three rules mentioned above without letting someone else’s temporarily better score impel a quick defection.

These four criteria roughly square off with a lot of maxims from everyday life. “Don’t be rude.” “Don’t be a sap.” “Don’t live in your pain.” “Envy eats itself if it has nothing else to chew on.” Etc.

One of the interesting optimizations of the basic strategy that works the best – “nice” tit-for-tat – is the introduction of random unrated forgivenesses every now and then. If there’s a 1 to 5% chance of letting a defector off the hook, the average overall score of the player who does so will improve slightly. The improvement margin is greater if each player has imperfect memory of the other player’s, or players’, moves.

This modification makes for an interesting speculation, as it does approach somewhat the Pareto-optimal solution of co-operating always: what would the effect be of introducing a player who always co-operates, regardless of losses, into a bunch of tit-for-tatters who are already in payback mode due to someone defecting earlier? If the others have perfect memory for each opponent, then such iron co-operativeness would be met with corresponding co-operativeness, from every other player, to the perfect co-operator. In a simulation, it would be the perfect winning strategy; in the real world, it would encourage co-operativeness to the point where defection becomes a winning option again.

If the game players use tit-for tat with perfect memory of what they suffered earlier, but with no memory of the previous opponent in a multi-player scenario, then a universal co-operator will tend to go deeply in the hole, relative to everyone else, at first. He or she will be the person who will be burdened with other people taking out their previous hurt on him/her without passing it along to anyone else. Such a person will act as a “payback sink.”

The result of such a strategy, though, will be to increase the amount of co-operativeness considerably, but not to the immediate benefit of the universal co-operator. The result of such an increase will be a move closer to Pareto optimality for the entire group, where no improvement in one person's condition is possible whout making someone else worse off.

Regardless, though, Dr. Axelrod’s four criteria do closely approximate everyday business conduct. The business world could be seen as a whole series of multi-player Prisoner’s Dilemma games already in progress.

It’s important to remember, though, that game theory is value-free. “Co-operativeness” can translate into “I’ll give you a break on the remittances if you put my product on the middle shelf” – or it can translate into “I’ll go to my board and say that a 20% pay raise will bring my salary in line with a comparable norm if you do so too,” or “I’ll hire your son if you hire mine.” Even an iron co-operator may be so only with respect to a certain group, refraining to do so for outsiders - perhaps by avoiding them.

A lot of white-collar crime does have this co-operative, or collusive, aspect to it. That’s why prosecutions in this area have the effect of ripping apart established iterated PD-type games and replacing them with the one-shot original.

Late Media Roundup: Brit Features

2007-06-23T21:19:00.001-04:00

This evening, there have been three webbed article from British newspapers that focus in part on the Conrad Black trial. One of them is a quote collection, the second is a digest, and the third posits the fate of Alfred Taubman as a cautionary tale for Conrad Black:

1. From the Observer, a quote from Eddie Greenspan, "'In America, you do not convict people for being rich.'" Right under it, there's a rejoinder.

2. "The City Diary" in The Independent has a recap of both Julie Ruder's and Edward Greenspan's closing addresses, after mentioning that the trial itself is almost over.

3. From the Times Online, the above-mentioned cautionary tale, entitled "To the slammer, by Gulfstream jet." It's about the former proprietor of Sotheby's, bought with the wealth he had earned by inventing the shopping mall. It presents Mr. Taubman as a poor kid who found his métier as a retailer, through concentrating on the shopping experience. The last part of the article does reveal his colourful side. (Of interest is his insistence that his then-CEO, Diana 'DeDe' Brooks, was the person responsible for agreeing to and implementing the price-fixing arrangement, despite the fact that he went to jail and she didn't. He also insists that he was singled out for jail because he was too rich for too long.)

Instead Of A Media Roundup

2007-06-23T09:06:00.001-04:00

Since there have been no stories webbed about the Conrad Black trial since last night, I've gotten some links from various Websites:

1. The most recent is from Matthew McClearn, in the Canadian Business Black trial blog. With refreshing detachment, he describes Julie Ruder's closing address for the prosecution as "a punchy, well-organized summary of the government’s case." Edward Genson's part of the closing address for Conrad Black is described as "a spirited but disorganized presentation." Gus Newman's part of the closing address for Jack Boultbee was given in a "voice [that] was emphatic throughout, but his argument seemed ad hoc, meandering and loosely structured." The only closing address that rated a compliment from Mr. McClearn was Patrick Tuite's, "whose deft use of analogies seemed to resonate with the audience." This entry was written early Thursday morning, so there are no capsule reviews of Csr. Schachter's closing address for Peter Atkinson. The overall topic is the jury's upcoming task to dissect motive, or lack of, in the case once the jurors are sequestered.

2. From the blog "SOX First," an entry mulling over the possibility that Conrad Black will be acquitted, posted June 13. It ends with: "If Black walks, all the corporate fat cats who have used company money as their own will breathe a sigh of relief."

3. A more recent entry from the same blog calls attention to a speech, by Russell Mokhiber, entitled "Twenty Things You Should Know About Corporate Crime."

4. The aggregation Website "Plugger" has a listing of Conrad Black trial reports from Australian news sources.

5. From the blog "Houston's Clear Thinkers," an entry that criticizes Rudolph Giuliani for shrinking away from the effects of the criminalization push, which he himself started, now that it's engulfed "Scooter" Libby. It mentions a name from the Michael Milken case that's long been forgotten.

6. A posting made about four weeks ago on the Free Republic shows a real diversity of opinion about the case amongst "Freepers."

Media Roundup: Theatrics and Ethics

2007-06-22T20:09:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and today, on the Conrad Black trial have gone into weekend mode once again, both dwinding in number and broadening in focus:

1. Peter Worthington's latest column, as webbed by the Ottawa Sun, begins with an anecdote about a juror who (briefly) took ill, and then turns to a summation of Michael Schachter's closing argument for Peter Atkinson's defense. His main tactic, according to Mr. Worthington, was the pointing out of discrepancies in the prosecution's case: "Like his colleagues, Schecter attacked the prosecution's summation and, aided by graphics, showed how the prosecution was selecting evidence, misleading and even misrepresenting previous testimony in order to bolster their cause." Also focused upon is the main theme of Csr. Schacter's closing argument: there is no evidence presented by the prosecution that implicates Mr. Atkinson. In addition, Mr. Worthington notes the point, also brought up during the closing argument for Jack Boultbee, that "CanWest insisted that Atkinson and Boultbee be included in non-competes, because they didn't want these two top newspaper executives being employed by the rival Globe and Mail or Toronto Star."

2. From Business Week, an article entitled "The Trouble With Business Ethics." The "trouble" that the article focuses upon is found in the narrower area of whistleblowing, and how the protections guaranteed by new laws are clashing with the more traditional right of the accused to face his/her [according to the article, it is sometimes "her"] accuser. This clash surfaces when the whistleblower is found to have made a mistaken accusation, indicating that there's a little more than outraged guilt behind a consequent tendency for a whistleblower's life to become harder after blowing the whistle. (One of the unintended consequences of whistleblowing, and being right, is simply becoming the centre of attention, a role that some employees find too stifling for them.)

3. Ameet Sachdev's latest report from the Chicago Tribune highlights the more theatrical moments of Csr. Schachter's closing address, including the point made that Mr. Radler's testimony hadn't implicated Mr. Atkinson in any criminal activity, nor had any other witnesses. (The article hints [or I discerned] that, had Csr. Schachter not made the last point, he would have left himself wide open to the prosecution saying that he's depending on the testimony of a "'proven liar'" [his own words describing Mr. Radler] to de-implicate his client.)

4. Andrew Clark of the Guardian has a feature that begins with a brief description of Jeffrey Skilling's first six months in jail. After doing so, he reviews the case as it stands, noting that the outcome is still uncertain. He also makes a point long known by public-choice theorists: that it's possible to victimize a large group of people a little, so as to not severally cause them enough pain to complain vociferiously but to bilk them by a large amount jointly. (Trivia note: how many people know that this economist is the grandaddy of public-choice theory?) Mr. Clark does note that there is a difference between Enron and Hollinger Int'l: the former went bust, while the latter hasn't. That difference in outcome, though, is likely to be reflected in the length of the sentence should any of the four be found guilty. America is going through a phase of severity towards white-collar crime.

5. A CP item, webbed by 1130 News, notes that the proceedings are over with for the week. The closing argument for Mr. Atkinson isn't done yet, and the one for Mr. Kipnis has yet to begin. In order to fit in with Judge St. Eve's schedule, those two plus the prosecutorial rebuttal have to be finished by Tuesday.

6. The Toronto Star has webbed a report by Rosie DiManno that compares the Conrad Black trial to the Frank Calabrese, Sr. trial. (Mr. Clark, in the report linked to above, was scrupulous enough to note that the two cases are different.)

7. Rick Salutin suggests in the first part of his latest column, as webbed by Rabble.ca, that the fortunes and misfortunes of Eddie Greenspan have overshadowed those of his client.

8. Chicago Public Radio has an interview with Diantha Parker, the reporter who has been watching the Conrad Black trial for that station. In it, she gave her assessment on how the closing arguments have gone. In the introduction, before starting the interview with Ms. Parker, the interviewer described Conrad Black as "eccentric," and Edward Genson as "ubiquitous." Once Ms. Parker began, she averred that the closing argument had salvaged the government’s case, and described the delivery of it as “compelling.” Julie Ruder’s strength was in tying the prosecution’s case together in the address. Ms. Parker highlighted this phrase from it: “he paid himself not to compete with himself” and said that “there was something about it.” Ms. Parker also noted that the other defendants have tried to “distance” themselves from Conrad Black, and speculated that it’s making the Black defense team “uncomfortable.” She also mentioned the David Radler factor, and brought up the prosecution's statement that the defense's claim that Mr. Radler acted alone is ridiculous. Csr. Genson added the comments on Black’s less-than-pleasing personality, according to Ms. Parker, because it may be a factor in the jury’s reasoning. She ended by opining that there would be something “fishy” if the verdict is returned before July 4th.

9. One of Eddie Greenspan's lines has made a Bloomberg list of quotable quotes from the past week from the world of business: "'The government doesn't have a smoking gun, because there isn't one. David Radler is all they've got.'"

10. A feature piece from Reuters looks at why Canadian shareholders tend to be less assertive complainers than American shareholders do. The perspective showcased in it - that people who hold their tongues are "wimps" - is an interesting one, as it comes from a worldview that respects complainers instead of holding them in contempt. (It did miss an important reason behind such a Canadian custom: lawyers are more respected up here than in the States, so there is a general self-expectation that any complaint you make had better be solid enough to stand up in court, if need be. In my own home city of Toronto, the 911 operator yells at people who make an unserious 911 call, and this raises no hackles. There's a subsidiary, but not universal, custom up here as well: the tendancy to expect people who complain to do something about it themselves.)

11. A third piece comparing the Conrad Black trial to the "Joey the Clown" trial has been written by David Litterick and webbed by the Telegraph. Mr. Litterick, in contrasting the two trials, says that Conrad Black is no Joey the Clown - as the buzz does show.

----------

Steve Skurka' latest entry in the blog "The Crime Sheet" contains a few items suggesting that the American justice system isn't as stellar as it was presented as this past week.

In his summation of the top reports for the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, Douglas Bell relates that any observer in the courtroom yesterday would have seen "a lot of giddy school’s-out behaviour among journos, lawyers and defendants alike." He also takes Mr. Clark to task for being sophistic in the feature report linked to above (item #4.)

The Verdict: Excerpt From Roundtable

2007-06-21T22:07:00.000-04:00

Tonight's episode of The Verdict had a brief sounding-out on the Conrad Black trial as part of a "legal roundtable" featuring Clayton Ruby, James Morton and Crown attorney Paul McDermott. Each guest had one comment on the trial.

Csr. Morton thinks that Conrad Black won’t be convicted, nor will the other three. The prosecution hasn’t done enough to meet their onus. If there will be any conviction, it will be on the obstruction of justice charge. Csr. McDermott mentioned the U.S. Attorney's 96% conviction rate, but he also noted that this case may not be typical; the outcome will depend on the facts of the case. Csr. Ruby said that the defense presented the better case, prior to closing arguments; the prosecution has saved their emphasis for the closing argument. Juries in America tend to be sympathetic to the prosecution, though, so the defense may not be as successful as some think.

Defense Closing Arguments, Day 3

2007-06-21T17:57:00.000-04:00

According to a Canadian Press report from 680 News, the closing statement for Peter Atkinson has started. Mr. Atkinson's counsel, Michael Schachter "says Atkinson never deceived or defrauded anyone - and the prosecution's own witnesses prove it." Instead, Csr. Schacter argued, the evidence showed that Mr. Atkinson was the guy who tried to put a stop to any irregularities. In addition to the above, an Associated Press report, webbed by WANDTV.com, contains one of Gus Newman's pithy comments, made earlier today: he called David Radler " a 'charade.'" The rest of this report also touches upon the content of the above CP report.

The Bloomberg report, written by Joe Schneider and Bob Van Voris, concentrates upon Csr. Schachter's words. It quotes Csr Schachter as saying, "'This is a criminal case, this isn't a game...' The prosecutors' objective 'is to win regardless of the facts,' he said.... Reaching down to the floor, Schachter twice picked up an armful of binders containing transcripts of Radler's eight days of testimony and slammed them down on a table between him and the jury." The rest of the report recounts a moment from Csr. Newman's closing argument, in which he said that James Thompson's "'silence was deafening'" when the chair of the Audit Committee.

[An update of the same report adds this excerpt from Csr. Schachter: "Atkinson was paid as a bonus for 'quarterbacking the biggest deal in Hollinger history' and the biggest in Canada that year, he told jurors." He also said that Mr. Atkinson had signed a non-compete agreement at Mr. Radler's request, and "only after the company's outside lawyers approved it."]

Reuters' report, written by Andrew Stern, also concentrates upon the closing address for Peter Atkinson. It begins with: "A lawyer for one of Conrad Black's three co-defendants urged jurors on Thursday not to lump the men together when they decide if the four stole millions of dollars from the former media baron's company." It discloses that the reference to the witnesses above was nestled in that context. "'You need to think about this as four separate trials.'"

Further details came from a BNN interview with Amanda Lang, aired at 1:54 PM ET. According to Ms. Lang, Csr. Schachter delivered a “spirited” argument. He said that the prosecution has to show intent, whcih they have not. Ms. Lang described his delivery as quite “stirring” when he said that there was no evidence against his client at all. He had yelled the “game” remark quoted above, including the part that the prosecution will do anything to win.

Csr. Schachter isn't concentrating on the testimony of Mr. Radler; he confined himself to saying that nothing Mr. Radler had testified to implicated his client. He did attack prosecution witnesses Darren Sukonick and the Audit Committee members, claiming that all of them had lied on the stand. Mr. Atkinson, according to Csr. Schacter, did exactly what an innocent man would have done back in '02 and '03. Ms. Lang described the prosecution as looking a little “green around the gills” during his address.

An updated version of the above report, as webbed by CBC News, contains a more complete version of the "game" excerpt mentioned above: "'[Prosecutor Jeff] Cramer stood before you [during opening arguments] and told you something there was no evidence of,' he said." Csr. Scachter then gave this reason for that accuation: "It's to confuse you. It's to make you think Peter was involved in something he had nothing to do with... It's to win regardless of the facts.'" The report also describes this reaction from the jury: "The increasingly weary jury perked up when Schachter began his closing arguments, appeared captivated by the intense former New York prosecutor who famously landed a conviction against home fashion diva Martha Stewart...."

Mary Vallis has some additional details in her report, webbed by the National Post. Noting that " Mr. Atkinson... faces charges of mail and wire fraud and filing false tax returns," it relates that Csr. Schachter said that Mr. Atkinson characterized the non-compete payment as a kind of bonus because none of the proceeds had come from what was due Hollinger International; all of the $2 million had come from the $80 million allocated for the overall non-compete payment from CanWest. (The prosecutors have already acknowledged that Mr. Black's share was legitimate.) More specifically, the funds had come from Mr. Radler's allocation: "'It's [money] coming out of Radler's pocket ...never a dime from Hollinger International,' Mr. Schacter said." He also said that the non-compete agreement with Mr. Atkinson was requested by CanWest. "Mr. Schachter suggested it was odd the government did not call any CanWest executives as witnesses to support the allegation when they had called several buyers in other transactions to testify they did not request non-compete agreements with the men on trial."

WQAD.com has webbed an AP summary report on today's closing arguments. A more detailed version has been webbed by the Houston Chronicle, starts with a recounting of Csr. Newman's testimony, including his exhortation to the jury asking them to question the motives of Mr. Radler. The latter half has highlights from Csr. Schachter's closing argument.

----------

Ms. Vallis has a side report from the trial, posted in the Financial Post's "Black Board," which shows that Eddie Greenspan's Canadianisms have proven to be contagious. Another written scene-shot from Ms. Vallis describes Csr. Newman getting a bit bogged down at the end of his own closing address.

Mark Steyn has piggybacked a comment upon Csr. Schachter's closing address by casting doubt on the ostensibly excellent conviction rate of Patrick J. Fitzgerald's office.

(Lest you think that this is a mere complaint, you may be interested to know that a retired professor of sociology, Jack D. Douglas, has made a career out of looking beyond supposedly hard statistics on human behaviour for the ambiguity within. One of the themes in his work has been the "problematic" element in social-science statistics. If you're interested, he was a young sociologist at the time of the Vietnam War, and he did cut his teeth on body-count-related figures.)

An interesting factoid is in Douglas Bell's latest entry in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, which explains why there's an otherwise surprising amount of favourable coverage for Conrad Black: Counselor and United States Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald sent a former reporter to jail some time ago, for keeping her mouth shut about a source. The entry itself focuses upon the recent prosecutorial hostility to a few Canadian reporters.

Media Roundup: Strange It Should Change?

2007-06-21T11:50:00.000-04:00

The media reports, webbed overnight and this morning, on the Conrad Black trial focused on the end of the closing argument for Mr. Black's defense, with some adding details about the one for Jack Boultbee:

1. Romina Maurino has written a report, webbed by the Hamilton Spectator, which summarizes the final part of the closing argument for Conrad Black's defense as given by Edward Genson.

2. A CP forecast report, webbed by the Brandon Sun, says that the closing argument for Mr. Boultbee's defense will wind up today, and will be followed by the closing argument for Peter Atkinson. [Ms. Maurino is credited for it in the version webbed by the Montreal Gazette.]

3. The report from Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune covers the parts of both closing arguments that were made yesterday. Edward Genson "blasted the government for making a contract dispute into a crime" with regard to the Manhattan apartment. "'The allegation suggesting that there was criminal intent is absurd,' Genson said." It also contains three points made by Gus Newman for Jack Boultbee: first of all, he stated that the documents don't change the story they convey; secondly, he "showed the jurors a 2002 memo sent to Hollinger's audit committee outlining non-compete payments to the executives that contradicted the testimony of the three audit committee members who said they were unaware of the transfer;" thirdly, he showed a memo sent to David Radler in 2000 that outlined "the tax-free status of non-compete payments in Canada..." which was inconsistent with Mr. Radler's claim on the stand that he had no knowledge of that status. Mr. Newman also noted that Mr. Boultbee, the alleged defrauder of Hollinger Int'l, was asked to testify on its behalf "in a civil lawsuit just a month before the fraud trial started."

4. The last hour of Csr. Genson's closing argument is mentioned in item #7, "Perks," in the Boston Globe's "Business Notebook."

5. The Ottawa Sun has webbed a Peter Worthington column "From The Trial," which starts off with: " As defence summations continue, the prosecution's case in the Conrad Black trial seems to get increasingly frail and, judging from its outline of evidence on the very first day, it was never very robust." He includes a couple of anecdotes about prosecutors complaining about the press coverage they got, concluding: "Clearly the prosecutors are touchy these days."

6. Toronto Star columnist "Slinger" has devoted part of his colmn to a faux-lament about the closure that the verdict in the trial will bring.

7. Also from the Star, Rosie DiManno has penned a polite piece about Barbara Black's ex-husband, George Jonas, showing up to watch the trial.

8. Thirdly, a report from the Star's Rick Westhead notes that Csr. Genson's last hour actually lasted about 75 minutes. His report also includes one of Csr. Newman's gags, as well as the introduction of a letter asking Mr. Radler to account for all of the non-compete payments except for the CanWest ones. Not asking for "any details regarding the CanWest deal... indicates there was nothing wrong with the transaction, Newman said."

9. Another Sun columnist, Lorrie Goldstein, has written about the trial. This latest column, as webbed by the Edmonton Sun, muses about the divergence in coverage, between Peter Worthington and Rosie DiManno, of Eddie Greenspan's part of the closing argument. [They're both linked to here: items #7 and #19, respectively.]

10. BNN aired an interview with Amanda Lang, at 8:24 AM. She began by reviewing Csr. Genson’s finish, and then mentioned the closing argument for Jack Boultbee. The other defendants are more focused on the credibility of David Radler because his testimony’s more central to the charges they face.

The prosecution depends in part on the jury lumping the four defendants together. There is a possibility that one defendant will be convicted while another, or others, will walk. (The former may not be Conrad Black either; Peter Atkinson's chances may not be that good.) There are no proceedings tomorrow. The defense will probably finish with all four closing arguments on Monday, followed by the prosecutorial rebuttal on Tuesday.

11. Mary Wisniewski of the Chicago Sun-Times has focused on both closing arguments in her latest report. It contains a one-liner from Csr. Newman about the documents in the case: "'Just because you don't like the contents doesn't mean you can suddenly erase them.'"

12. The Elgin Courier News' "News Tracker" has an item, distilled from Associated Press reports, on the end of Csr. Genson's closing argument.

13. The Montreal Gazette has webbed Mary Vallis' report, entitled "Not Black's fault that he is rich: defence." It sums up the entire closing argument for Conrad Black.

14. The latest report by Paul Waldie, webbed by the Globe and Mail, goes into two other legal disputes that Conrad Black is facing. The first part details the Sotheby Realty lawsuit against Mr. Black. The second part details another lawsuit that was launched by Hollinger Inc. against Sun-Times Media Group, which has been in progress for some time but was stayed for the length of the criminal trial. The latter suit is "over a decision Lord Black made 10 years ago to transfer newspapers from the Canadian parent to the Chicago-based company. Hollinger Inc. alleges the move deprived it of valuable assets, but Sun-Times recently filed motions to dismiss the claim."

(Evidently, Hollinger Inc. has already decided that it has good reason to sue STMG for actions done when the latter was still Hollinger Int'l. The new CEO of Hollinger Inc., Wesley Voorheis, has been the 'chief litigating officer' for the company.)

15. A mention of both the trial and Conrad Black's latest book, Invincible Quest, appears in the "Strewth" column in the Australian.

----------

Mark Steyn, in his Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, has passed along Patrick Tuite's attempted impugnment of Jonathan Rosenberg's testimony at the trial, after displaying his own suspicions about pecuniary (careerist) motives for Csr. Rosenberg to shade the truth a little.

680 News has webbed a broadly related news item: a Supreme Court decision (8-1) that imposes a rigorous standard for the courts to hold plaintiffs to for securities lawsuits. Judges that are presented with such suits "must weigh possible innocent explanations for defendants' conduct at the very start of a securities fraud case. Doing so can lead to early dismissal of investors' lawsuits."

The Verdict: How'd He Do?

2007-06-20T20:40:00.000-04:00

Tonight's episode of The Verdict had a short segment assessing the state of Conrad Black's defense. There were two guests, former prosecutor Pat Woodward and regular Steve Skurka.

Csr. Woodward said that the closing argument was fairly effective for the defense. Both counsels concentrated on the crucial witness. Csr. Skurka added that jurors were offered a break, but they refused it. They want to get the trial over with, and they are still engaged.

The two weakest counts are the perk count and the obstruction of justice charge, according to Csr. Skurka. As far as the others are concerned, Csr. Woodward observed, the money trail is significant. There's the self-dealing and the buyers testifying that they didn't ask for the non-compete agreements. If their testimony is found to be credible by the jury, then there will be a conviction on the associated counts. Csr. Skurka brought up the expert counter-testimony about requests not being obligatory, and the performance of the Audit Committee. Csr. Woodward asked him about any intent to deceive on the committee members' part: the jurors may find it difficult to believe that their former governor, James Thompson, had lied to save his skin. Csr. Skurka replied that five witnesses contradicted him while they were on the stand.

Csr. Skurka then gave a forecast. The prosecution has 2 hours’ worth of rebuttal, after which the instructions to the jury will be given: there could be a verdict by the end of next week.