BNN and CTV NewsNet have aired noon reports, saying that the trial will adjourn early today, because those boxes have arrived. The defense team wants a chance to examine the contents, so the trial will adjourn two hours early. According to CTV reporter David Akin, the boxes are believed to contain cheque stubs and E-mails.
Havard Gould of CBC News also filed a report, which had snippets from Mr. Radler's testimony today. He was supposed to detail the scheme, and he did testify that Conrad Black “directed” him to divert a payment to the holding company: “certainly, I didn’t say no.” About one sale, he said he “didn’t know whether it was legal or not” but now he “regrets” it. Mr. Gould also mentioned the boxes.
CBC Newsworld also had an interview with lawyer Andrew Stoltmann, aired at about 12:20 PM ET. He saw the decision to adjourn early and the defense filing a motion to disallow the oft-played security-cam videotape showing Mr. Black taking the boxes out of 10 Toronto Street in 2005. He said that the controversy is over the question of its reliability as evidence. If the tape is included, and the prosecution argues that he shouldn’t have removed them at all, it would be persuasive to the jury. Discussing Mr. Radler’s truncated testimony so far, Csr. Stoltmann reported that it was credible, but it “hasn’t tied Conrad Black to the fraud” yet. We don't know if he'll effective in doing so, or if his testimony will be impeached. The prosecution team think that they have a paper trail, but it's not very thick. The testimony, and credibility, of David Radler is the key to their case.
Csr. Stoltmann also noted that the defense will spend “a huge amount of time” on the plea agreement during the cross-examination. When anchor Nancy Wilson asked about the defense's motions disturbing the prosecution's momentum, he answered that the prosecution often thinks that momentum is crucial, but it may not be at this stage: thanks to the early adjourment, the defense will not have the chance to cross-examine Mr. Radler, so the jury will have time overnight to mull over the direct testimony without it being challenged.
The webbed reports are coming in as well. The Chicago Daily Southtown has webbed an Associated Press report, by Mike Robinson, that starts with: "The government's star witness at media mogul Conrad Black's fraud trial testified today Black himself ordered millions of dollars paid to a smaller Toronto-based company he owned." When questioned about the 75/25 split of non-compete payments between Hollinger Int'l and Hollinger Inc., called the "template" according to the indictment, Mr. Black "'confirmed that was the plan,' Radler testified. 'He said yes, and that was it.'"
An updated report from David Akin mentioned that the boxes, which have been finally tabled today by the government, got there after a long legal wrangle. CTV NewsNet anchor Kate Wheeler pointed out that they might merely contain personal items, as Mr. Black has claimed.
Mr. Akin also held up an example, as one of the alleged crimes with repect to the defendants, Mr. Radler's sketching out in testimony how Horizon Publishing, which he and Mr. Black own large chunks of, asked for a non-compete agreement from Hollinger Int'l in exchange for a payment from Horizon. Mr. Akin described this transaction as “strange.” He held it up as an example of the prosecution being "much more effective" today.
Another webbed report, in the Turkish Press, fills in some detail about the so-called template. "Radler told the jury that the buyers had requested that Hollinger International sign a non-compete agreement but that there was no reason for the holding company to be considered a competitor." He also testified that "Black told him in a telephone conversation that the holding company, as a parent, "deserved" a portion of the payment... 'I was aware that there was absolutely no reason to move (the money)," he said in testimony that was struck from the record." It also mentions a non-disclosure on Mr. Radler's part that ties in with non-knowledge of the law mentioned above.
A much briefer AP report has been webbed by WQAD.com. It pegs Mr. Radler's testimony "in Chicago today [as] the first to tie Black directly to the transfer of tens of millions of dollars that the government maintains belonged to the Hollinger International media empire."
The beginning of Bloomberg's latest report, by Andrew Harris and Thom Weidlich, is more explicit: "Conrad Black oversaw the transfer of $15.2 million from Hollinger International Inc. to a Canadian holding company he controlled, his former business partner David Radler testified at Black's criminal fraud trial. As the rest of the report relates, the bulk of the $15.2 million came from 25% of the non-compete payment made with the 1999 sale of newspaper properties to Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc.
[The updated version of the same report contains additional information, including this snippet: "Twice Radler told the court it would have been 'impossible' to tell Hollinger's audit committee or its chairman, former Illinois Governor James R. Thompson, about payments made to the holding company or to the defendants under the noncompete agreements...'I believed it was impossible because if the buyer didn't want the noncompetes, why offer noncompetes?'...'']
Just as the trial day was over, BNN broadcasted an interview with Amanda Lang. She reported that it has been a “surprising day,” including the early adjournment. Those boxes contain many cheque stubs, but there are also e-mails filed under various “Musings” categories that the prosecution wants to look over. The “meat” of Mr. Radler's testimony was heard today: he testified that it was Conrad Black’s idea to transfer part of the non-compete money to Hollinger Inc.
Reuters' report, by Andrew Stern and James Kelleher, is entitled "Star witness Radler details deals at Black trial." On page 2, it relates that Mr. Radler "continued to be somewhat of a difficult witness for the prosecution, often forcing Sussman to ask his question several times and sometimes responding with rambling answers.
"'I need you to pay more attention to my questions,'" Sussman instructed him at one point."
Romina Maurino's report on today's testimony, webbed by Canada.com, also discloses that "Conrad Black was behind a decision to funnel millions of dollars away from Hollinger International shareholders and into the pockets of executives," according to Mr. Radler. An updated report by her, webbed by 570 News, has more detail about both Mr. Black's behaviour and Mr. Radler's: "During much of Tuesday's testimony, Black scribbled notes and whispered to his lawyer while Radler remained calm and smiled at the jury often... [a]t times, [though,] he appeared startled by the defence's constant objections and unsure of what to do, sometimes searching for words." Near its end, it relates that Mr. Radler thought "they were allowed to [divert some non-compete fee funds to Hollinger Inc.] so as long as they got approvals from the audit committee..."
Theresa Tedesco and Mary Vallis have written an article, webbed by the Edmonton Journal, that starts off by summarizing Mr. Radler's testimony and then reports on what the story behind those 13 boxes was. The defense got photocopies of its contents this morning, and "complained about the prosecution springing the documents on them at the last minute. Edward Genson, one of Lord Black’s lawyers, accused the prosecution of setting up a 'straw horse' and taking it down." The motion and the consequent early end to today's part of the trial, mentioned above, resulted from this surprise. [The anecdote weaved into the end of this report was one also passed along by Mark Steyn.] A version webbed by Canada.com has a different opening summary.
BNN broadcast another interview with Amanda Lang, aired at about 5:55 PM ET, which not only added a few details from today's testimony but ended with a forecast on what to expect from tomorrow's cross-examination. Despite today's revelations from Mr. Radler, Ms. Lang reported, Conrad Black remained “stone-faced.” It was a good day for the prosecution in terms of believable testimony. Mr. Radler testified that Mr. Black was the first one who came up with the idea to transfer some non-compete money to Hollinger Inc., back in 1998. Once done, “the genie was out of the bottle.” She also noted that a lot of his testimony “just begs” for Mr. Black to testify, as it was about conversations between the two men with no outside witnesses present. (The first part of the evidentiary proffer for this case cited relevant precedents that legitimized this kind of testimony.) The cross-examination is likely to go after inconsistencies, and hunt for any kind of falsehood. She passed along the opinion that the defense is telegraphing their cross-examination through the objections they've made. Csr. Greenspan's strategy is hard to guess, but Ms. Lang expects him to go on a direct attack on Mr. Radler's credibility. She suggested watching closely for the questions asked about the $2 million non-compete fee from the American Trucker transaction: who was it that transferred the money to Hollinger Inc.? (Presumably, if Csr. Greenspan sways the jury regarding who it was, the genie will point right at Mr. Radler.)
----------
Mark Steyn, anticipating the cross-examination, makes the point in an entry in his Maclean's trial blog that Mr. Radler himself got the most money from the non-compete agreements, and that there's a suspicious lack of phone records between he and the defendants. A more recent one begins by noting, "[a]fter two months, the United States Government has got the glimmering of an argument."
And, from Toronto Life's Conrad Black trial blog, Douglas Bell's discussion of yesterday's coverage offers the jaundiced, or perhaps jaded, observation that "reports on Radler’s first day on the stand made a lot out of not a lot." He did seem to like the colour analyses of the tie, though.
Also: the "Black Board" has a JPEGged copy of the invoice for Mrs. Black's 60th birthday party from La Gernouille, and has a link to a PDF copy of the menu and the guest list, as well as the invoice for it.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Media Roundup: Radler Direct
The media reports on the Conrad Black trial, webbed overnight, have jumped in number, and have propagated to otherwise-unfamiliar venues for this trial:
1. The Chicago Tribune's report details Mr. Radler's testimony, including the two key parts that, according to the prosecution, prove motive - "'In the late 1990s, the management fees started to decrease and debt started piling up... We were both concerned with the fact that there was a debt problem,' he said, referring to conversations he had with Black." - and opportunity: "'I did not make a major financial decision without consulting Conrad Black,' Radler said."
2. From the Houston Chronicle, an Associated Press report that recounts the highlights of Mr. Radler's testimony yesterday. It was written by Mike Robinson.
3. Andrew Clark of the Guardian not only reports on Mr. Radler's testimony, including the part that explains what the prosecution considers to be sufficient motive - "We were both concerned with the fact that there was a debt problem at Ravelston [which he had discussed privately with Mr. Black]... We had bank commitments and salary commitments, and we had to have enough income to take care of both of them."- but also recounts in detail the testimony of Jan Akerhielm about the surprise party for Mrs. Black. "According to the restaurant bill, the 94-strong party got through 18 bottles of 1993 Dom Pérignon champagne at $320 each. They enjoyed 26 bottles of Chassagne-Montrachet, 23 bottles of Clos de Vougeot and two bottles of Sancerre." At the end, the article passes along two questions during cross-examination, one dealing with the profession of the noted guests and the other asking Ms. Akerhielm to confirm that she didn't know whether or not business was conducted at that party.
4. From NineMSN.com, a report that balances the defense argument with Mr. Radler's testimony, and ends with comment from Mr. Black, in French: "Black, who has the habit of only answering questions in French, told reporters "I have no comment until the defense finishes with this witness[' testimony]." ("Je n'a aucun commentaire avant que la defense termine avec cette temoinage.") (Cet temoinard, il est un termine, selon des éspérances du défense. Sorry; I couldn't resist.) Near its beginning, the report also notes a mistake made by Mr. Radler near the beginning of his testimony, one noted earlier by CTV's David Akin.
5. The Hamilton Spectator has webbed an abridged report by Romina Maurino, entitled "End of a friendship."
6. From the Daily Herald of Illinois, a report that starts off with: "Prosecutors worked hard Monday to paint a picture of Conrad Black and his second in command, David Radler, as a couple of ambitious entrepreneurs who met in their mid-20s, took personal trips together, attended each other’s marriages and often drove long distances together to buy remote community newspapers — a journey that would result in one of the world’s largest newspaper chains." It also mentions that cross-examination could start as early as today.
7. The Ottawa Citizen has webbed the latest from Mary Vallis, which notes that the jurors' interest was visibly lost when Mr. Radler began going into the details of the American Trucker transaction. It also passes along an admission by Mr. Radler that he communicated with Mr. Black by fax and memo; he "did not... send the company chairman e-mails, saying he 'didn't know how.'" In addition, its second paragraph states that "[h]e stopped short... of making what is expected to be the prosecution's main point -- that Lord Black and three former Hollinger International executives cooked up a non-compete scheme to steal money from the company when they realized other sources of income were running out." This 'stop' will almost certainly turn into 'go' today.
8. Also by Ms. Vallis and webbed by the Citizen, a full-length article descibing the testimony of Ms. Akerheilm about the birthday party, including excerpts from the menu. At the end, the report notes, deadpan, that the defense established that the audit committee members were in attendance too.
9. The Washington Post has webbed a Bloomberg report on yesterday's testimony from Mr. Radler.
10. The National Post's Theresa Tedesco has written a feature report on Mr. Radler's testimony that concentrates upon his bearing and demeanor, as well as his testimony. It also recounts the testimony of Ms. Akerhielm, Mr. Black's "patrician former secretary at Hollinger International Inc.," and "six exhibits [introduced during her testimony] offering titillating morsels of a $62,000 surprise birthday party for Barbara Amiel at a swishy French restaurant in New York."
11. An article by Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail reports that "Mr. Radler spoke clearly and frequently addressed his comments directly to the jury rather than prosecutor Eric Sussman." It focuses upon Mr. Radler's recounting of the their business activities in the 1970s and the 1980s, including the days right after Conrad Black had won control of Argus Corp.
12. The Toronto Star's Jennifer Wells has written a lively report that starts off with a description of Mr. Radler as "The rat. The traitor. The turncoat." It also brings up Mr. Radler's mistaken dating of the year he first met Mr. Black, with this reaction: "Lordy, lordy. For a brief second I thought the entire trial should be tossed right out the window onto Dearborn Ave,, for if the star witness, who has pleaded guilty to fraud and is co-operating with the prosecution, can't remember when he met the man of the hour after days of coaching, then what is one to do?" The rest of her report continues in a similar vein while working in the meat of Mr. Radler's testimony.
13. Peter Worthington is still on the trial beat; his latest column has been webbed by the Calgary Sun. He described Mr. Radler as "tanned and mildly furtive," but also noted that "[t]hose who expected (or hoped for) Radler to implode or disintegrate were in for a shock." He's the only one to mention that Conrad Black's relative relaxation was not shared by Mrs. Black, who fixed Mr. Radler with a "venomous stare." Mr. Worthington also offers the assessment that "[s]o far, there is very little paper trail extending to Black. Most of Radler's dealings with him were by phone or in person. Virtually no faxes, e-mails or memos came from Black to Radler, but many from Radler to Black."
14. From Mary Wisniewski of the Chicago Sun-Times, a report entitled "Radler: We were a team" and sub-titled, "STAR WITNESS: 'I didn't make a financial decision without consulting Conrad Black'" Near its end, it sketches out what the defense hopes to show in cross-examination.
15. The Times Online has a report by James Bone, entitled "Black faces newest foe – his deputy." It has a different take on Mr. Radler's recounting of the early history of his and Mr. Black's business relationship, highlighting the cultural differences between the two. In addition, it mentions that Conrad Black's accession to a life peerage did rub Mr. Radler raw. Also from it: "Lord Black has left no doubt about his contempt for Mr Radler’s decision to testify against him. Before the trial he said that he was looking forward to what he said would be a three-day cross-examination of Mr Radler 'after which there will be nothing left of him'." The report ends with a brief recounting of Ms. Akerhielm's testimony.
16. Sun-Times columnist Mark Brown's latest focuses on David Radler looking good on the witness stand.
17. The Halifax Chronicle-Herald has another abridgement of a report by Romina Maurino, entitled "Black knew about dealings at heart of fraud case, Radler tells court."
18. Another item from the Sun-Times: a joke at Conrad Black's expense in today's "Random Thoughts" by columnist Elliot Harris.
19. From Editor and Publisher, an article by Mark Fitzgerald entitled "Star Witness Radler Says He And Black Were Joined At Hip." It notes that "Radler was calm in the witness stand, often laughing at little glitches in the proceedings, and chuckling while answering the prosecutor’s questions," and then mentions that the defense's objections gave him a foretaste of the cross-examination. It also mentions that, unlike Conrad Black, "Edward Genson... moved his seat so he could stare directly at Radler through the testimony." Like several of the others linked to in this page, it ends with Ms. Akerhielm's testimony.
20. The Tribune's media columnist, Phil Rosenthal, focuses on the fact that David Radler was oddly formal in his reference to Conrad Black. "It was reminiscent of those wealthy families one hears about where the kids get sent off to boarding school as soon as they're toilet trained and call their dads 'Sir.' But maybe that's the formality demanded by a guy like Black, who renounced his Canadian citizenship so he could acquire a British title. Who knows?" He ends with noting an objection, overruled by Judge St. Eve, that "pointed out it had taken an hour for the prosecution and Radler to cover five years of their relationship, a span that preceded the period of Black's alleged transgressions by more than 20 years."
21. CBC News: Morning aired an interview with Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black, at approximately 7:45 AM. He reported that the jury will hear the story of Mr. Black's and Mr. Radler's recent business relationship for the first time today. The prosecution has proved that they were “pretty tight” for many years. Mr. Radler was “curiously at ease” but did squint and was startled by some noises. Conrad Black loosened up too as the afternoon wore on. The jury was a little “sleepy” but was “7 out of 10 engaged.” When asked by anchor Andrew Nichols if this intermittent attention was bad for the prosecution, Mr. Siklos replied that they were more interested in the party details, implying that it's impossible to tell. He further opined that the jury will pay attention to the cross-examination.
Formally, it will be easy for Eddie Greenspan to show that Mr. Radler has been untruthful, in the sense that his admissions have contradicted his previous statements, and it will be easy to show that Radler was at the heart of the transactions covered by the charges.
22. Also on CBC News: Morning, an interview with correspondent Havard Gould, who's covering the trial for CBC News. He reported that the prosecution will outline “the scheme” today, which will get to the meat of the their case. There was “high anticipation” as Mr. Radler entered the courtroom. He concurred with Mr. Siklos’ comment about Mr. Black's relaxation, and he did mention the date slipup by Mr. Radler. When the proceedings ended for the day, Conrad Black shot a cold stare at his former partner.
23. BNN had an interview with Amanda Lang, aired at 8:25 AM ET. She reported that David Radler did “surprisingly well” – even better than the prosecution team itself has done. He reached the events of 1998 by the end of yesterday's session. The part covered by the indictment will be dealt with today. Mr. Black didn’t look much at Mr. Radler, but he did made notes intently. She observed, in concordance with Mr. Gould, that Conrad Black had shot the “steeliest glance” she had ever seen at Mr. Radler at the end of the day; the latter didn’t look at him then. The early part of the tale had a certain human interest, as did seeing one former partner turning on the other. Today's testimony will get into the “nitty gritty,” in which the prosecution must prove that there was a conspiracy. The defense will watch closely for suppositional language.
24. David Akin made an appearance on CTV NewsNet this morning, and had this to report: The prosecution will “reinforce” the picture of tight-knittedness painted yesterday. Eric Sussman and the other prosecutors have anticipated the defense argument that geographical separation implied business separation. The lifestyles and locales of Mr. Radler and Mr. Black were very different. The prosecution continually implied, though, that the two were in close contact, which is a major theme of Mr. Radler's testimony. When Mr. Akin was asked whether or not motive was testified about by CTV NewsNet anchor Marcia MacMillan, he answered that Mr. Radler said that the management fees for Ravelston were shrinking, and its debts needed to be serviced. Thus, Ravelston needed more money; for this purpose, the two came up with the idea of the non-compete agreements. Mr. Akin also brought up the prosecution's image management for Mr. Radler, aimed at making him seem approachable in contradisctinction to the “aristocratic” Black. This image retool may make it easier for jury to identify with him.
25. The New York Post has a report by Janet Whitman, entitled "Black-Stabber." The first paragraph is at odds with the image of the sleepy jury: "Jurors at Conrad Black's fraud trial scribbled furiously in their notebooks yesterday as the dethroned newspaper baron's turncoat deputy took the stand for the first time and began to testify about his old boss' alleged skullduggery." She not only notes Mr. Radler's attire, but also Mr. Black's.
26. A brief AP summary of Mr. Radler's testimony has been webbed by the Cincinnati Post. [A slightly different one has been webbed by Australia's Victoria Herald-Sun.]
27. The fourth item in AP's "Executive Morning Briefing," webbed by Forbes.com, has an even briefer, one-paragraph, summary.
28. Paul Waldie's second report of the day has also been webbed by the Globe and Mail. It starts off by anticipates a "gruelling" cross-examination, which will be started off by Csr. Greenspan. "The showdown with Mr. Radler is expected to be gripping because much is riding on his testimony. He is the only witness prosecutors have lined up so far to prove that Lord Black and the others conspired to take millions of dollars from Hollinger." The rest of it reviews Mr. Radler's testimony so far.
29. A CP summary has been webbed by the Orillia Packet and Times.
30. From CTV News, a report with description and analysis of Mr. Radler's testimony so far by Steve Skurka.
31. The First Post has yet another report on Mr. Radler's testimony by Paul Waldie.
32. The Maisonneuve article "Strip-Mining Canadian Business" has a one-paragraph item, entitled "Radler Rats On Black."
33. A brief report webbed by 680 News, quotes law professor Steve Landsman, who said to "Global News that this could very well be the turning point of the trial.
"'Having someone inside in these sorts of matters is often critical and whether you believe them is where the decision is going to be made,' he said."
----------
The Globe and Mail has a related item, which features rapper Ice-T: it's a defense of snitching.
1. The Chicago Tribune's report details Mr. Radler's testimony, including the two key parts that, according to the prosecution, prove motive - "'In the late 1990s, the management fees started to decrease and debt started piling up... We were both concerned with the fact that there was a debt problem,' he said, referring to conversations he had with Black." - and opportunity: "'I did not make a major financial decision without consulting Conrad Black,' Radler said."
2. From the Houston Chronicle, an Associated Press report that recounts the highlights of Mr. Radler's testimony yesterday. It was written by Mike Robinson.
3. Andrew Clark of the Guardian not only reports on Mr. Radler's testimony, including the part that explains what the prosecution considers to be sufficient motive - "We were both concerned with the fact that there was a debt problem at Ravelston [which he had discussed privately with Mr. Black]... We had bank commitments and salary commitments, and we had to have enough income to take care of both of them."- but also recounts in detail the testimony of Jan Akerhielm about the surprise party for Mrs. Black. "According to the restaurant bill, the 94-strong party got through 18 bottles of 1993 Dom Pérignon champagne at $320 each. They enjoyed 26 bottles of Chassagne-Montrachet, 23 bottles of Clos de Vougeot and two bottles of Sancerre." At the end, the article passes along two questions during cross-examination, one dealing with the profession of the noted guests and the other asking Ms. Akerhielm to confirm that she didn't know whether or not business was conducted at that party.
4. From NineMSN.com, a report that balances the defense argument with Mr. Radler's testimony, and ends with comment from Mr. Black, in French: "Black, who has the habit of only answering questions in French, told reporters "I have no comment until the defense finishes with this witness[' testimony]." ("Je n'a aucun commentaire avant que la defense termine avec cette temoinage.") (Cet temoinard, il est un termine, selon des éspérances du défense. Sorry; I couldn't resist.) Near its beginning, the report also notes a mistake made by Mr. Radler near the beginning of his testimony, one noted earlier by CTV's David Akin.
5. The Hamilton Spectator has webbed an abridged report by Romina Maurino, entitled "End of a friendship."
6. From the Daily Herald of Illinois, a report that starts off with: "Prosecutors worked hard Monday to paint a picture of Conrad Black and his second in command, David Radler, as a couple of ambitious entrepreneurs who met in their mid-20s, took personal trips together, attended each other’s marriages and often drove long distances together to buy remote community newspapers — a journey that would result in one of the world’s largest newspaper chains." It also mentions that cross-examination could start as early as today.
7. The Ottawa Citizen has webbed the latest from Mary Vallis, which notes that the jurors' interest was visibly lost when Mr. Radler began going into the details of the American Trucker transaction. It also passes along an admission by Mr. Radler that he communicated with Mr. Black by fax and memo; he "did not... send the company chairman e-mails, saying he 'didn't know how.'" In addition, its second paragraph states that "[h]e stopped short... of making what is expected to be the prosecution's main point -- that Lord Black and three former Hollinger International executives cooked up a non-compete scheme to steal money from the company when they realized other sources of income were running out." This 'stop' will almost certainly turn into 'go' today.
8. Also by Ms. Vallis and webbed by the Citizen, a full-length article descibing the testimony of Ms. Akerheilm about the birthday party, including excerpts from the menu. At the end, the report notes, deadpan, that the defense established that the audit committee members were in attendance too.
9. The Washington Post has webbed a Bloomberg report on yesterday's testimony from Mr. Radler.
10. The National Post's Theresa Tedesco has written a feature report on Mr. Radler's testimony that concentrates upon his bearing and demeanor, as well as his testimony. It also recounts the testimony of Ms. Akerhielm, Mr. Black's "patrician former secretary at Hollinger International Inc.," and "six exhibits [introduced during her testimony] offering titillating morsels of a $62,000 surprise birthday party for Barbara Amiel at a swishy French restaurant in New York."
11. An article by Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail reports that "Mr. Radler spoke clearly and frequently addressed his comments directly to the jury rather than prosecutor Eric Sussman." It focuses upon Mr. Radler's recounting of the their business activities in the 1970s and the 1980s, including the days right after Conrad Black had won control of Argus Corp.
12. The Toronto Star's Jennifer Wells has written a lively report that starts off with a description of Mr. Radler as "The rat. The traitor. The turncoat." It also brings up Mr. Radler's mistaken dating of the year he first met Mr. Black, with this reaction: "Lordy, lordy. For a brief second I thought the entire trial should be tossed right out the window onto Dearborn Ave,, for if the star witness, who has pleaded guilty to fraud and is co-operating with the prosecution, can't remember when he met the man of the hour after days of coaching, then what is one to do?" The rest of her report continues in a similar vein while working in the meat of Mr. Radler's testimony.
13. Peter Worthington is still on the trial beat; his latest column has been webbed by the Calgary Sun. He described Mr. Radler as "tanned and mildly furtive," but also noted that "[t]hose who expected (or hoped for) Radler to implode or disintegrate were in for a shock." He's the only one to mention that Conrad Black's relative relaxation was not shared by Mrs. Black, who fixed Mr. Radler with a "venomous stare." Mr. Worthington also offers the assessment that "[s]o far, there is very little paper trail extending to Black. Most of Radler's dealings with him were by phone or in person. Virtually no faxes, e-mails or memos came from Black to Radler, but many from Radler to Black."
14. From Mary Wisniewski of the Chicago Sun-Times, a report entitled "Radler: We were a team" and sub-titled, "STAR WITNESS: 'I didn't make a financial decision without consulting Conrad Black'" Near its end, it sketches out what the defense hopes to show in cross-examination.
15. The Times Online has a report by James Bone, entitled "Black faces newest foe – his deputy." It has a different take on Mr. Radler's recounting of the early history of his and Mr. Black's business relationship, highlighting the cultural differences between the two. In addition, it mentions that Conrad Black's accession to a life peerage did rub Mr. Radler raw. Also from it: "Lord Black has left no doubt about his contempt for Mr Radler’s decision to testify against him. Before the trial he said that he was looking forward to what he said would be a three-day cross-examination of Mr Radler 'after which there will be nothing left of him'." The report ends with a brief recounting of Ms. Akerhielm's testimony.
16. Sun-Times columnist Mark Brown's latest focuses on David Radler looking good on the witness stand.
17. The Halifax Chronicle-Herald has another abridgement of a report by Romina Maurino, entitled "Black knew about dealings at heart of fraud case, Radler tells court."
18. Another item from the Sun-Times: a joke at Conrad Black's expense in today's "Random Thoughts" by columnist Elliot Harris.
19. From Editor and Publisher, an article by Mark Fitzgerald entitled "Star Witness Radler Says He And Black Were Joined At Hip." It notes that "Radler was calm in the witness stand, often laughing at little glitches in the proceedings, and chuckling while answering the prosecutor’s questions," and then mentions that the defense's objections gave him a foretaste of the cross-examination. It also mentions that, unlike Conrad Black, "Edward Genson... moved his seat so he could stare directly at Radler through the testimony." Like several of the others linked to in this page, it ends with Ms. Akerhielm's testimony.
20. The Tribune's media columnist, Phil Rosenthal, focuses on the fact that David Radler was oddly formal in his reference to Conrad Black. "It was reminiscent of those wealthy families one hears about where the kids get sent off to boarding school as soon as they're toilet trained and call their dads 'Sir.' But maybe that's the formality demanded by a guy like Black, who renounced his Canadian citizenship so he could acquire a British title. Who knows?" He ends with noting an objection, overruled by Judge St. Eve, that "pointed out it had taken an hour for the prosecution and Radler to cover five years of their relationship, a span that preceded the period of Black's alleged transgressions by more than 20 years."
21. CBC News: Morning aired an interview with Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black, at approximately 7:45 AM. He reported that the jury will hear the story of Mr. Black's and Mr. Radler's recent business relationship for the first time today. The prosecution has proved that they were “pretty tight” for many years. Mr. Radler was “curiously at ease” but did squint and was startled by some noises. Conrad Black loosened up too as the afternoon wore on. The jury was a little “sleepy” but was “7 out of 10 engaged.” When asked by anchor Andrew Nichols if this intermittent attention was bad for the prosecution, Mr. Siklos replied that they were more interested in the party details, implying that it's impossible to tell. He further opined that the jury will pay attention to the cross-examination.
Formally, it will be easy for Eddie Greenspan to show that Mr. Radler has been untruthful, in the sense that his admissions have contradicted his previous statements, and it will be easy to show that Radler was at the heart of the transactions covered by the charges.
22. Also on CBC News: Morning, an interview with correspondent Havard Gould, who's covering the trial for CBC News. He reported that the prosecution will outline “the scheme” today, which will get to the meat of the their case. There was “high anticipation” as Mr. Radler entered the courtroom. He concurred with Mr. Siklos’ comment about Mr. Black's relaxation, and he did mention the date slipup by Mr. Radler. When the proceedings ended for the day, Conrad Black shot a cold stare at his former partner.
23. BNN had an interview with Amanda Lang, aired at 8:25 AM ET. She reported that David Radler did “surprisingly well” – even better than the prosecution team itself has done. He reached the events of 1998 by the end of yesterday's session. The part covered by the indictment will be dealt with today. Mr. Black didn’t look much at Mr. Radler, but he did made notes intently. She observed, in concordance with Mr. Gould, that Conrad Black had shot the “steeliest glance” she had ever seen at Mr. Radler at the end of the day; the latter didn’t look at him then. The early part of the tale had a certain human interest, as did seeing one former partner turning on the other. Today's testimony will get into the “nitty gritty,” in which the prosecution must prove that there was a conspiracy. The defense will watch closely for suppositional language.
24. David Akin made an appearance on CTV NewsNet this morning, and had this to report: The prosecution will “reinforce” the picture of tight-knittedness painted yesterday. Eric Sussman and the other prosecutors have anticipated the defense argument that geographical separation implied business separation. The lifestyles and locales of Mr. Radler and Mr. Black were very different. The prosecution continually implied, though, that the two were in close contact, which is a major theme of Mr. Radler's testimony. When Mr. Akin was asked whether or not motive was testified about by CTV NewsNet anchor Marcia MacMillan, he answered that Mr. Radler said that the management fees for Ravelston were shrinking, and its debts needed to be serviced. Thus, Ravelston needed more money; for this purpose, the two came up with the idea of the non-compete agreements. Mr. Akin also brought up the prosecution's image management for Mr. Radler, aimed at making him seem approachable in contradisctinction to the “aristocratic” Black. This image retool may make it easier for jury to identify with him.
25. The New York Post has a report by Janet Whitman, entitled "Black-Stabber." The first paragraph is at odds with the image of the sleepy jury: "Jurors at Conrad Black's fraud trial scribbled furiously in their notebooks yesterday as the dethroned newspaper baron's turncoat deputy took the stand for the first time and began to testify about his old boss' alleged skullduggery." She not only notes Mr. Radler's attire, but also Mr. Black's.
26. A brief AP summary of Mr. Radler's testimony has been webbed by the Cincinnati Post. [A slightly different one has been webbed by Australia's Victoria Herald-Sun.]
27. The fourth item in AP's "Executive Morning Briefing," webbed by Forbes.com, has an even briefer, one-paragraph, summary.
28. Paul Waldie's second report of the day has also been webbed by the Globe and Mail. It starts off by anticipates a "gruelling" cross-examination, which will be started off by Csr. Greenspan. "The showdown with Mr. Radler is expected to be gripping because much is riding on his testimony. He is the only witness prosecutors have lined up so far to prove that Lord Black and the others conspired to take millions of dollars from Hollinger." The rest of it reviews Mr. Radler's testimony so far.
29. A CP summary has been webbed by the Orillia Packet and Times.
30. From CTV News, a report with description and analysis of Mr. Radler's testimony so far by Steve Skurka.
31. The First Post has yet another report on Mr. Radler's testimony by Paul Waldie.
32. The Maisonneuve article "Strip-Mining Canadian Business" has a one-paragraph item, entitled "Radler Rats On Black."
33. A brief report webbed by 680 News, quotes law professor Steve Landsman, who said to "Global News that this could very well be the turning point of the trial.
"'Having someone inside in these sorts of matters is often critical and whether you believe them is where the decision is going to be made,' he said."
----------
The Globe and Mail has a related item, which features rapper Ice-T: it's a defense of snitching.
Monday, May 7, 2007
The CBC Evening News' David Radler Special
David Radler's testimony at the Conrad Black trial was the top story on the broadcast of CBC's The National. Correspondent Neil Macdonald reported that Mr. Radler "delivered a lot of his testimony with a little grin,” as if he was thumbing his nose at Mr. Black. Mr. Radler recounted the Sterling/Hollinger acquisitions right up to the U.S. ones. He also testified that he discussed the drying up of the management fees with Mr. Black, and Mr. Black said he was “concerned” about them. Mr. Macdonald also noted that jurors are more likely to remember concrete details of luxuries, such as the ones that were testified about this morning by Janice Akerhielm, before Mr. Radler started.
There was also a brief interview with Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black. He said that Mr. Radler was uncharacteristically “at ease,” and had seemed to have put his earlier life behind him. The crucial statement in his testimony was: he “never made any financial decisions without consulting Mr. Black.” The crucial question is, will the jury believe it? Mr. Siklos expects “attempted evisceration” from the defense team. They will try to show Mr. Radler has been a liar on the stand.
The feature segment, by CBC correspondent Havard Gould, was also devoted to the David Radler story. Before they met, both Mr. Radler and Mr. Black were impressed by newspapers’ profit potential. Mr. Radler was an unapologetic cost-cutter; he was even unapologetic when he printed the Sherbrooke Record in the U.S. to save on printing costs.
Peter C. Newman distinguished the two as follows: Conrad Black was the great thinker and the “great presence,” but David Radler was the numbers and details man. He even knew how many people to fire in order to to maximize the profitability of a newspaper without crimping it. A former employee also interviewed for this feature, Jeremy Hainsworth, noted that Mr. Radler even charged employees for pencils. Mr. Black, the report continued, was the publicity hound, and Mr. Radler made it possible. He had an encyclopedic memory for the numbers. His home was “expensive, but not ostentatious.” His business lunches were even eaten standing up, according to what Mr. Newman saw when lunching with him.
Mr. Radler “ruled” in Chicago. Neil Steinberg, a Chicago Sun-Times columnist also interviewed for the feature, repeated the story about Mr. Radler shutting down the escalators in the Sun-Times building, which turned out to be a “false economy” because it raised elevator costs. He described Radler as “ethically corrosive.” The Sun-Times employees have few fond memories of their former publisher.
When trouble hit them, Mr. Black and Mr. Radler stuck together at first, but Mr. Radler rolled when confronted by prosecutors. Mr. Hainsworth thought it was a pragmatic decision, a “simple calculation” in Mr. Gould’s words.
Mr. Newman pegged Mr. Radler as a loner, but someone who has to be “engaged" in activity. Mr. Sternberg described him as having a cutthroat demeanor and a humorless man when the boss, but he doesn’t know how the jury will take to him.
After the feature report, there was more from Richard Siklos. When asked by anchor Mark Kelley if he'll be believable, based on testimony so far, Mr. Siklos answered, “largely believable,” but the cross-examination will decide. Mr. Siklos related that, at one point in the direct examination when Mr. Radler was asked about selling American papers at the time Hollinger Int'l was in difficulty (in the late 1990s,) he testified that it was Conrad Black’s decision, and also testified that he “didn’t disagree” with that decision. Mr. Siklos found this “disingenuous.” It was David Radler, after all, who was the main force behind buying some of those papers up as Hollinger Int'l sold them. Mr. Siklos then noted that, after both were kicked out, Mr. Radler “pre-rolled” with respect to the payback to the company, and it was Mr. Black who stuck to his guns. When asked why the fall-out between them occurred, he answered that Mr. Radler was the most senior associate, but there were others, such as co-defendants Peter Atkinson and Jack Boultbee. They all were somewhat like children vying for the attentions of a neglectful father. The falling-out between the two was telegraphed in advance by Mr. Radler’s complaints about Conrad Black whiile they were still at Hollinger Int'l; those complaints started about the time that Conrad Black had been awarded a life peerage.
----------
The last word tonight might as well be Mark Steyn's. As you might expect, he was unimpressed by Mr. Radler's testimony so far. He described the testimony as "garrulous" but smokeless, gun-wise.
There was also a brief interview with Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black. He said that Mr. Radler was uncharacteristically “at ease,” and had seemed to have put his earlier life behind him. The crucial statement in his testimony was: he “never made any financial decisions without consulting Mr. Black.” The crucial question is, will the jury believe it? Mr. Siklos expects “attempted evisceration” from the defense team. They will try to show Mr. Radler has been a liar on the stand.
The feature segment, by CBC correspondent Havard Gould, was also devoted to the David Radler story. Before they met, both Mr. Radler and Mr. Black were impressed by newspapers’ profit potential. Mr. Radler was an unapologetic cost-cutter; he was even unapologetic when he printed the Sherbrooke Record in the U.S. to save on printing costs.
Peter C. Newman distinguished the two as follows: Conrad Black was the great thinker and the “great presence,” but David Radler was the numbers and details man. He even knew how many people to fire in order to to maximize the profitability of a newspaper without crimping it. A former employee also interviewed for this feature, Jeremy Hainsworth, noted that Mr. Radler even charged employees for pencils. Mr. Black, the report continued, was the publicity hound, and Mr. Radler made it possible. He had an encyclopedic memory for the numbers. His home was “expensive, but not ostentatious.” His business lunches were even eaten standing up, according to what Mr. Newman saw when lunching with him.
Mr. Radler “ruled” in Chicago. Neil Steinberg, a Chicago Sun-Times columnist also interviewed for the feature, repeated the story about Mr. Radler shutting down the escalators in the Sun-Times building, which turned out to be a “false economy” because it raised elevator costs. He described Radler as “ethically corrosive.” The Sun-Times employees have few fond memories of their former publisher.
When trouble hit them, Mr. Black and Mr. Radler stuck together at first, but Mr. Radler rolled when confronted by prosecutors. Mr. Hainsworth thought it was a pragmatic decision, a “simple calculation” in Mr. Gould’s words.
Mr. Newman pegged Mr. Radler as a loner, but someone who has to be “engaged" in activity. Mr. Sternberg described him as having a cutthroat demeanor and a humorless man when the boss, but he doesn’t know how the jury will take to him.
After the feature report, there was more from Richard Siklos. When asked by anchor Mark Kelley if he'll be believable, based on testimony so far, Mr. Siklos answered, “largely believable,” but the cross-examination will decide. Mr. Siklos related that, at one point in the direct examination when Mr. Radler was asked about selling American papers at the time Hollinger Int'l was in difficulty (in the late 1990s,) he testified that it was Conrad Black’s decision, and also testified that he “didn’t disagree” with that decision. Mr. Siklos found this “disingenuous.” It was David Radler, after all, who was the main force behind buying some of those papers up as Hollinger Int'l sold them. Mr. Siklos then noted that, after both were kicked out, Mr. Radler “pre-rolled” with respect to the payback to the company, and it was Mr. Black who stuck to his guns. When asked why the fall-out between them occurred, he answered that Mr. Radler was the most senior associate, but there were others, such as co-defendants Peter Atkinson and Jack Boultbee. They all were somewhat like children vying for the attentions of a neglectful father. The falling-out between the two was telegraphed in advance by Mr. Radler’s complaints about Conrad Black whiile they were still at Hollinger Int'l; those complaints started about the time that Conrad Black had been awarded a life peerage.
----------
The last word tonight might as well be Mark Steyn's. As you might expect, he was unimpressed by Mr. Radler's testimony so far. He described the testimony as "garrulous" but smokeless, gun-wise.
The Verdict: Two Sides Of David Radler
More than half of the latest episode of The Verdict was devoted to David Radler's testimony and to David Radler the man. There were three segments: the first featured CTV News reporter David Akin, who was reporting on the Conrad Black trial today; the second had a panel of three lawyers, David Frenkel, James Morton and Steve Skurka; the third had a panel of three journalists, Susan Chandler, David Olive and Steve Maich.
Mr. Akin said that we won’t know how strong a witness Mr. Radler is until the cross-examination of him is over. He was “uncharacteristically nice” while on the stand; he laughed, including at himself. He was clearly distancing himself, in terms of character, from the “aristocratic Black.” The prosecution's strategy is to show that they were a close-knit team, and were even close personally. Ms. Todd noted that Mr. Radler has to perform to live up to his plea agreement, which the jury was informed of at the outset. The jury will be hear more about it, especially from the defense. Ms. Todd then asked, why would Radler roll? Mr. Akin answered that it's hard to say, as Mr. Radler is not much of a public figure; he's “notoriously shy” regarding interviews. What's known of him is almost all second-hand knowledge. He seems to be “repentant,” and desirous of changing his ways. His family may have been relevant to that.
Ms. Todd's discussion with the legal panel, Csrs. Frenkel, Morton and Skurka, revolved around plea bargains. They're commonly used in cases such as this one in the U.S., but are, as Csr. Morton disclosed, very unusual in Canada, as such agreements are presumed to colour the facts. The truth may be told, but "whose truth?" One point of disagreement between the three was how efficacious, for the defense, an aggressive cross-examination would be. Csr. Morton ventured that Eddie Greenspan will have to be careful, as too aggressive a cross would alienate the jury. He did note that the defense has a good record regarding skilled cross-examinations. Csr. Skurka disagreed, noting that Mr. Radler is not exactly Andrew Fastow; he opined that the cross should be “hard-hitting” and “aggressive.” He also noted that there are no supporting documents to substantiate a conspiracy.
What will be decisive, will be Mr. Radler's credibility: how will the jury take to him? Csr. Morton noted that the prosecution has painted Mr. Radler as ”friendly and avuncular,” which the jury may see as disingenuous, especially if his business style gets entered into evidence. Csr. Skurka, when asked by Ms. Todd if Mr. Black will go on the stand, replied: not a chance, unless David Radler wows the jury. When Ms. Todd asked Csr. Frenkel if the prosecution team is in trouble, he said that they're “challenged,” based upon what he’s read. This part of the trial is its cusp. Csr. Morton added that, ironically, Conrad Black is still the underdog. This segment ended with Csr. Skurka repeating his line about the prosecution's case, before Mr. Radler's appearance, being “the Titanic looking for an iceberg.”
The third segment was a discussion between Ms. Todd and three journalists, Susan Chandler, David Olive and Steve Maich. Ms. Todd started the discussion off by referring to Mr. Radler's well-known repute as a “fierce businessman and fierce boss.” Mr. Olive answered that what we know and what the jury will find out are going to be “quite different.” Mr. Radler only cared about the money, but the jury probably won’t hear about it. He relayed a rumor that Mr. Radler sometimes demanded employees give him Christmans presents, and opened them in front of the employees. Mr. Maich concurred that Mr. Radler was not exactly known for his charm.
But that might not matter as far as his credibility is concerned. Mr. Maich stated that it is going to be hard to “completely obliterate his credibility.” Ms. Chandler observed that “juries don’t like rats.” So, Mr. Radler has something to live down; the defense will say that he’s been lying all along. Mr. Olive, though, concurred with Mr. Maich. The physical sacrifices that Mr. Radler will have to make during his incarceration might impress the jurors and win them over. In the Enron case, the “rats” won. He noted, after being asked about the monicker by Ms. Todd, that such people are called “rats” because they've cut deals, and have also breached a kind of personal loyalty. Ms. Chandler added that Mr. Radler was not a whistleblower because the prosecution came to him, and (presumably) leaned on him to roll. If the defense team can flesh out his “mean-spiritedness,” then they will have the advantage. Mr. Olive suggested that Mr. Black may not have known whether or not what Radler did was illegal. He disclosed that he puts “a lot of credence” in protestations of innocence, implying that he's prone to believe that Conrad Black is not guilty.
In Ms. Todd's "closing argument" at the end of the show, after a segment on another issue, she said that Mr. Radler has been heavily criticized as a “rat” even before he took the stand. But how can it affect his reputation now, when he’s already admitted to it? What's relevant is, is he still one, or is he now a “repentant rat?” He does have an incentive to shaft Conrad Black, but he runs a huge risk if he embellishes his testimony – he’ll make an enemy out of the Justice Department too.
Mr. Akin said that we won’t know how strong a witness Mr. Radler is until the cross-examination of him is over. He was “uncharacteristically nice” while on the stand; he laughed, including at himself. He was clearly distancing himself, in terms of character, from the “aristocratic Black.” The prosecution's strategy is to show that they were a close-knit team, and were even close personally. Ms. Todd noted that Mr. Radler has to perform to live up to his plea agreement, which the jury was informed of at the outset. The jury will be hear more about it, especially from the defense. Ms. Todd then asked, why would Radler roll? Mr. Akin answered that it's hard to say, as Mr. Radler is not much of a public figure; he's “notoriously shy” regarding interviews. What's known of him is almost all second-hand knowledge. He seems to be “repentant,” and desirous of changing his ways. His family may have been relevant to that.
Ms. Todd's discussion with the legal panel, Csrs. Frenkel, Morton and Skurka, revolved around plea bargains. They're commonly used in cases such as this one in the U.S., but are, as Csr. Morton disclosed, very unusual in Canada, as such agreements are presumed to colour the facts. The truth may be told, but "whose truth?" One point of disagreement between the three was how efficacious, for the defense, an aggressive cross-examination would be. Csr. Morton ventured that Eddie Greenspan will have to be careful, as too aggressive a cross would alienate the jury. He did note that the defense has a good record regarding skilled cross-examinations. Csr. Skurka disagreed, noting that Mr. Radler is not exactly Andrew Fastow; he opined that the cross should be “hard-hitting” and “aggressive.” He also noted that there are no supporting documents to substantiate a conspiracy.
What will be decisive, will be Mr. Radler's credibility: how will the jury take to him? Csr. Morton noted that the prosecution has painted Mr. Radler as ”friendly and avuncular,” which the jury may see as disingenuous, especially if his business style gets entered into evidence. Csr. Skurka, when asked by Ms. Todd if Mr. Black will go on the stand, replied: not a chance, unless David Radler wows the jury. When Ms. Todd asked Csr. Frenkel if the prosecution team is in trouble, he said that they're “challenged,” based upon what he’s read. This part of the trial is its cusp. Csr. Morton added that, ironically, Conrad Black is still the underdog. This segment ended with Csr. Skurka repeating his line about the prosecution's case, before Mr. Radler's appearance, being “the Titanic looking for an iceberg.”
The third segment was a discussion between Ms. Todd and three journalists, Susan Chandler, David Olive and Steve Maich. Ms. Todd started the discussion off by referring to Mr. Radler's well-known repute as a “fierce businessman and fierce boss.” Mr. Olive answered that what we know and what the jury will find out are going to be “quite different.” Mr. Radler only cared about the money, but the jury probably won’t hear about it. He relayed a rumor that Mr. Radler sometimes demanded employees give him Christmans presents, and opened them in front of the employees. Mr. Maich concurred that Mr. Radler was not exactly known for his charm.
But that might not matter as far as his credibility is concerned. Mr. Maich stated that it is going to be hard to “completely obliterate his credibility.” Ms. Chandler observed that “juries don’t like rats.” So, Mr. Radler has something to live down; the defense will say that he’s been lying all along. Mr. Olive, though, concurred with Mr. Maich. The physical sacrifices that Mr. Radler will have to make during his incarceration might impress the jurors and win them over. In the Enron case, the “rats” won. He noted, after being asked about the monicker by Ms. Todd, that such people are called “rats” because they've cut deals, and have also breached a kind of personal loyalty. Ms. Chandler added that Mr. Radler was not a whistleblower because the prosecution came to him, and (presumably) leaned on him to roll. If the defense team can flesh out his “mean-spiritedness,” then they will have the advantage. Mr. Olive suggested that Mr. Black may not have known whether or not what Radler did was illegal. He disclosed that he puts “a lot of credence” in protestations of innocence, implying that he's prone to believe that Conrad Black is not guilty.
In Ms. Todd's "closing argument" at the end of the show, after a segment on another issue, she said that Mr. Radler has been heavily criticized as a “rat” even before he took the stand. But how can it affect his reputation now, when he’s already admitted to it? What's relevant is, is he still one, or is he now a “repentant rat?” He does have an incentive to shaft Conrad Black, but he runs a huge risk if he embellishes his testimony – he’ll make an enemy out of the Justice Department too.
David Radler On The Stand, Cont'd
BNN had an interview with Amanda Lang, which aired at 5:50 PM ET. She reported that there were “riveting elements” as he testified, but there were moments of tedium too. The prosecution elicited testimony on Mr. Black and Mr. Radler's early years; they spent one full hour on the events of 1969. The prosecutors are trying to prove that the two were always in cahoots, which would knock down the defense theory that Radler acted alone with regard to the transactions under indictment. Mr. Radler is the “linchpin” of the conspiracy allegation. When Mr. Radler disclosing that Ravelston was losing cash flow (presumably in the late 1990s) and added that the loss went to the point where salaries were affected, the defense successfully objected that he was being speculative - and he then apologized for being so. Mr. Radler looked relaxed to Ms. Lang, and was “engaging” the jury. He glanced at them. He also seems to have been coached. Furthermore, he tried to be warm to Mr. Black when discussing the early days, which went unreciprocated. Ms. Lang relayed that the prosecution expects to wrap up tomorrow; then, it will be the defense’s turn. She doesn't know how long the cross-examination will last. Conrad Black's reaction to the appearance of Mr. Radler was: at first, he didn’t look at him; then later, Mr. Black stared in the direction of witness stand; but, he did glare at Mr. Radler when the latter (temporarily) left the stand.
Also aired was a CTV report, on CTV NewsNet a little after 6 PM ET. It started off with a report by Joy Malbon, in which Edward Genson was quoted to the effect that Mr. Radler will not prove to be that credible. Neither Mr. Black nor Eddie Greenspan gave a statement. After that part was finished, David Akin, the CTV reporter put in the courtroom, came on. He reported that the prosecution wants to make sure that Mr. Black and Mr. Radler are seen as “partners in crime” by the jury. Eric Sussman asked Mr. Radler repeatedly during today's direct examination if he had checked with Mr. Black when making various business maneuvers, to which the latter assented. Mr. Black and his lawyers made notes frequently, and there were frequent objections from defense counsels. The justification for Mr. Radler saying he has no reason to lie is plain: if the defense proves that he did lie, then his plea bargain is broken. Cross-examination will probably start “late tomorrow,” according to Mr. Akin. [There's a CTV News report webbed, which summarizes the coverage on CTV News aired throughout the day. It also has broadband links to three clips.]
The Bloomberg report, written by Thom Weidlich and Andrew Harris, details that Mr. Radler testified explicitly that he consulted with Black "'on anything that could be described as a major management decision,''' starting with the purchase of their first newspaper in 1969, the Sherbrooke Record, an English-language daily in southeast Quebec." He also was "the first to testify about who arranged, and received, the noncompete fees. His testimony supported government claims that the two men worked closely for more than 30 years, including the time during which they are accused of stealing money from Hollinger." The rest of the report has background on his testimony, and a recap of this morning's.
Canadian Business has webbed a lengthy article by Romina Maurino that reports on Mr. Radler's testimony; her report covers all of it so far. It goes into detail about Mr. Radler's testimony of how close the two were in the early years of their working relationship, which drew recurrent objections from the defense once it was implied that they were close friends, or even friends. Right after being sworn in, he also testified that "'[w]e discussed every aspect of every newspaper we had,... I discussed with Mr. Black on any major decision (that) could be considered an executive decision.'" Also included in her report is this forecast regarding tomorrow's testimony under direct examination: "Radler is expected to testify Black and the others cooked up the non-compete scheme when they realized other sources of income were running out and that the defendants illegally inserted themselves into the agreements and knew they were breaching their fiduciary duties when they choose to do so."
An abridged, and uncredited, version of the same report by Ms. Maurino has been webbed by CBC News. It leaves out (amongst a few other items) the name of that personal assistant of Mr. Black's, who testified this morning that Mr. Black told her to split the bill for the birthday party between he and Hollinger Int'l so that he would pay 1/3 and the company would pay 2/3 of the cost (Janice Akerhielm.) Also, a much briefer Associated Press report, which sums up all of Mr. Radler's testimony so far, has been webbed by ABCMoney.co.uk.
The report by Reuters' Andrew Stern and James Kelleher quotes copiously from Mr. Radler's testimony. It mentions that: Mr. Radler testified that he had "'pled guilty to fraud.... to taking money from Hollinger International under illegal circumstances'"; that there were debt problems at Ravelston resulting from reductions in the management fees due it, and that both he and Mr. Black knew this; and, that he did not operate independently of Mr. Black, as "'Conrad Black had executive responsibility over all of the company and I had operational responsibility.'" When "[a]sked [by Eric Sussman] if he bought and sold newspapers on his own, Radler said: 'I would keep him totally informed about transactions.'" He also testified that he had discussed strategy with Mr. Black during that time.
The Associated Press' report is also out, written by Mike Robinson and webbed by nwi.com. It summarizes today's testimony, but has some detail on what Ms. Akerhielm testified to this morning at its bottom. A different and slightly briefer article, webbed by Pravda, also encapsulates Mr. Radler's entire testimony so far.
----------
Matthew McClearn of Canadian Business has a three-part entry on "The Moment of Truth" in his trial blog. That three-parter not only reviews the case so far but establishes context to the trial in a way that's even-handed. Part 1 is here, part 2 is here, and part 3 is here.
Douglas Bell's own list of media reports, in Toronto Life's Conrad Black trial blog, goes into detail on the weekend tattle by Jeff Chevalier. A later entry manages to work in both R. Kelly and Jay-Z in such a way as to relate to the trial. Mr. Bell is evidently a versatile writer.
Also aired was a CTV report, on CTV NewsNet a little after 6 PM ET. It started off with a report by Joy Malbon, in which Edward Genson was quoted to the effect that Mr. Radler will not prove to be that credible. Neither Mr. Black nor Eddie Greenspan gave a statement. After that part was finished, David Akin, the CTV reporter put in the courtroom, came on. He reported that the prosecution wants to make sure that Mr. Black and Mr. Radler are seen as “partners in crime” by the jury. Eric Sussman asked Mr. Radler repeatedly during today's direct examination if he had checked with Mr. Black when making various business maneuvers, to which the latter assented. Mr. Black and his lawyers made notes frequently, and there were frequent objections from defense counsels. The justification for Mr. Radler saying he has no reason to lie is plain: if the defense proves that he did lie, then his plea bargain is broken. Cross-examination will probably start “late tomorrow,” according to Mr. Akin. [There's a CTV News report webbed, which summarizes the coverage on CTV News aired throughout the day. It also has broadband links to three clips.]
The Bloomberg report, written by Thom Weidlich and Andrew Harris, details that Mr. Radler testified explicitly that he consulted with Black "'on anything that could be described as a major management decision,''' starting with the purchase of their first newspaper in 1969, the Sherbrooke Record, an English-language daily in southeast Quebec." He also was "the first to testify about who arranged, and received, the noncompete fees. His testimony supported government claims that the two men worked closely for more than 30 years, including the time during which they are accused of stealing money from Hollinger." The rest of the report has background on his testimony, and a recap of this morning's.
Canadian Business has webbed a lengthy article by Romina Maurino that reports on Mr. Radler's testimony; her report covers all of it so far. It goes into detail about Mr. Radler's testimony of how close the two were in the early years of their working relationship, which drew recurrent objections from the defense once it was implied that they were close friends, or even friends. Right after being sworn in, he also testified that "'[w]e discussed every aspect of every newspaper we had,... I discussed with Mr. Black on any major decision (that) could be considered an executive decision.'" Also included in her report is this forecast regarding tomorrow's testimony under direct examination: "Radler is expected to testify Black and the others cooked up the non-compete scheme when they realized other sources of income were running out and that the defendants illegally inserted themselves into the agreements and knew they were breaching their fiduciary duties when they choose to do so."
An abridged, and uncredited, version of the same report by Ms. Maurino has been webbed by CBC News. It leaves out (amongst a few other items) the name of that personal assistant of Mr. Black's, who testified this morning that Mr. Black told her to split the bill for the birthday party between he and Hollinger Int'l so that he would pay 1/3 and the company would pay 2/3 of the cost (Janice Akerhielm.) Also, a much briefer Associated Press report, which sums up all of Mr. Radler's testimony so far, has been webbed by ABCMoney.co.uk.
The report by Reuters' Andrew Stern and James Kelleher quotes copiously from Mr. Radler's testimony. It mentions that: Mr. Radler testified that he had "'pled guilty to fraud.... to taking money from Hollinger International under illegal circumstances'"; that there were debt problems at Ravelston resulting from reductions in the management fees due it, and that both he and Mr. Black knew this; and, that he did not operate independently of Mr. Black, as "'Conrad Black had executive responsibility over all of the company and I had operational responsibility.'" When "[a]sked [by Eric Sussman] if he bought and sold newspapers on his own, Radler said: 'I would keep him totally informed about transactions.'" He also testified that he had discussed strategy with Mr. Black during that time.
The Associated Press' report is also out, written by Mike Robinson and webbed by nwi.com. It summarizes today's testimony, but has some detail on what Ms. Akerhielm testified to this morning at its bottom. A different and slightly briefer article, webbed by Pravda, also encapsulates Mr. Radler's entire testimony so far.
----------
Matthew McClearn of Canadian Business has a three-part entry on "The Moment of Truth" in his trial blog. That three-parter not only reviews the case so far but establishes context to the trial in a way that's even-handed. Part 1 is here, part 2 is here, and part 3 is here.
Douglas Bell's own list of media reports, in Toronto Life's Conrad Black trial blog, goes into detail on the weekend tattle by Jeff Chevalier. A later entry manages to work in both R. Kelly and Jay-Z in such a way as to relate to the trial. Mr. Bell is evidently a versatile writer.
David Radler Is On The Stand
CBC NewsNet has just reported that David Radler has taken the stand. According to CTV reporter David Akin, his testimony had just begun as of the lunch break. The direct examination of him began at the beginning; his oath was emphasized. He made a mistake right off the bat, when he said that he and Mr. Black met in 1971, and that got Mr. Black speaking to Eddie Greenspan. (Mr. Radler later corrected that mistake.) He also testified about their personal as well as business relationship during those years. Mr. Akin had worked for Mr. Black and Mr. Radler, at the Hamilton Spectator and the National Post, and described Mr. Black as the "good boss" and Mr. Radler as the "bad boss."
Amanda Lang, interviewed on BNN as of 1:35 PM or so, reported that he seemed relaxed as he began his direct testimony. The hard part for Mr. Radler, of course, won't start until the cross-examination. There's also a written CP report out, webbed by 680 News, which has a mention of the start of Mr. Radler's testimony, plus a little background on him.
Bloomberg also has an updated report, starting with the news that Mr. Radler has begun testifying. After the oath business was gotten out of the way. he testified that he "'took money from Hollinger International in circumstances that were not allowed.' ...[H]e told prosecutor Eric Sussman [under preliminary questioning] that he understood that, if he was found to have lied on the stand, his plea arrangement would be cancelled... [Mr. Radler also] told the jury he paid restitution of more than $8.5 million and, under the agreement, he will serve almost 2 ½ years in prison regardless of the trial's outcome." A further update relates that Mr. Radler testified to Conrad Black's habit of wooing powerful people while Mr. Radler "focused on financial details and cost-cutting." [A fourth update reports that Conrad Black's personal assistant testified about Mrs. Black's 60th birthday party before Mr. Radler took the stand.]
The Associated Press report, by Mike Robinson, is also out, as webbed by the Chicago Sun-Times. It discloses that, before the lunch break was declared, Mr. Radler testified about how he met Mr. Black, why he agreed to partner with him, and about the early days of their partnership. (At that time they were both running Sterling Newspapers. Trivia: The word "argent" is French for "silver" as well as "money.) Near its end, this report has a slightly different version of the quote reproduced by the Bloomberg report: "'''I took money from Hollinger in a way that isn't allowed,'' he told the jury after settling into the witness box."
Romina Maurino's report, on the start of Mr. Radler's testimony, has been webbed by the Vancouver Sun. It adds detail on a point which Mr. Akin's CTV report mentioned: "On taking the stand, Radler acknowledged his plea bargain with prosecutors: My obligation is to tell the truth, Radler told court as he prepared to testify against his long-time friend and business partner." [An updated version of the same report, webbed by CBC News, notes, amongst other additional facts, that "Black's lawyers objected repeatedly to prosecutor questions, especially those framing the two men as friends or describing the depth of their friendship."]
Added details are also in Paul Waldie's latest, written with Christie Blatchford and webbed by the Globe and Mail, about Mr. Radler and Mr. Black's first meeting. It also discloses that, when Eric Sussman asked Mr. Radler to specify what he pleaded guilty to, he answered "'I pleaded guilty to fraud. To taking money from Hollinger International in circumstances that were not allowed.'"
CTV NewsNet has also aired an updated report from Mr. Akin at 3 PM ET. He related the story of how Mr. Radler started off ownership of the Sherbrooke Record: laying off 40% of the staff. Mr. Black was "the public face" of the two. The prosecution wants to paint a picture of the two as "inseparable." Mr. Akin also reported that the plea agreement is contingent upon Mr. Radler being both "truthful" and "helpful" to the prosecution. If he's discredited, in other words, his sentence might be upped.
A report by Mary Vallis, webbed by Global National, covers the same subject too, but relates that Mr. Black "stared into his own hands as Radler passed." The Reuters report, by Andrew Stern and James Kelleher, adds a detail about Mr. Radler's initial testimony: when asked by Eric Sussman how "'major financial and business decisions [were] made'" back in those days, Mr. Radler replied, "'They were jointly made'". It also describes Mr. Radler as appearing, while on the stand, "rumpled and wispy-haired, frequently mumbling. He was told to speak up."
(As Mark Steyn notes below, Mr. Radler will probably testify later that decisions were always made jointly until the two split apart, which would cover the time of the transactions covered by the indictment.)
According to the latest report by Havard Gould, broadcast by CBC Newsworld at 4 PM ET, Mr. Radler's testimony is proceeding at a "glacial pace" because the prosecution is going out of its way to show how close the two were as partners.
The report from Stephanie Kirchgaessner of FT.com, as webbed by MSNBC.com, has a third version of that "not allowed" quote: "'I [pleaded] guilty to fraud . . . to taking money from Hollinger International . . . in certain senses that were not allowed,' Mr Radler said, in response to questions from the chief prosecutor in the case, Eric Sussman, on his 2005 plea agreement. "
Reuters' latest report, webbed by KPLC7.com, has details on some of Mr. Radler's afternoon testimony at the bottom of it, which continues with the history of his and Mr. Black's partnership (in the colloquial sense) as their publishing empire grew through the 1970s and '80s.
----------
Mark Steyn's own take on the beginning of Mr. Radler's testimony ends with: "The prosecution are evidently trying to play this as a classical tragedy - the seeds of Conrad Black's downfall were sown in the fatal character flaws he demonstrated in rural Quebec nearly 40 years ago. It makes a change from arguments over auditing advice."
(On the lighter side, CNN has reported that Conrad Black is sharing a counsel with singer R. Kelly. It also reports that the judge scheduled to hear the case, Vincent Gaughan, "fell off a ladder at home, sending him to the hospital with multiple fractures." That accident is something I can relate to, having been through the same ordeal at the end of September, 2005.)
Amanda Lang, interviewed on BNN as of 1:35 PM or so, reported that he seemed relaxed as he began his direct testimony. The hard part for Mr. Radler, of course, won't start until the cross-examination. There's also a written CP report out, webbed by 680 News, which has a mention of the start of Mr. Radler's testimony, plus a little background on him.
Bloomberg also has an updated report, starting with the news that Mr. Radler has begun testifying. After the oath business was gotten out of the way. he testified that he "'took money from Hollinger International in circumstances that were not allowed.' ...[H]e told prosecutor Eric Sussman [under preliminary questioning] that he understood that, if he was found to have lied on the stand, his plea arrangement would be cancelled... [Mr. Radler also] told the jury he paid restitution of more than $8.5 million and, under the agreement, he will serve almost 2 ½ years in prison regardless of the trial's outcome." A further update relates that Mr. Radler testified to Conrad Black's habit of wooing powerful people while Mr. Radler "focused on financial details and cost-cutting." [A fourth update reports that Conrad Black's personal assistant testified about Mrs. Black's 60th birthday party before Mr. Radler took the stand.]
The Associated Press report, by Mike Robinson, is also out, as webbed by the Chicago Sun-Times. It discloses that, before the lunch break was declared, Mr. Radler testified about how he met Mr. Black, why he agreed to partner with him, and about the early days of their partnership. (At that time they were both running Sterling Newspapers. Trivia: The word "argent" is French for "silver" as well as "money.) Near its end, this report has a slightly different version of the quote reproduced by the Bloomberg report: "'''I took money from Hollinger in a way that isn't allowed,'' he told the jury after settling into the witness box."
Romina Maurino's report, on the start of Mr. Radler's testimony, has been webbed by the Vancouver Sun. It adds detail on a point which Mr. Akin's CTV report mentioned: "On taking the stand, Radler acknowledged his plea bargain with prosecutors: My obligation is to tell the truth, Radler told court as he prepared to testify against his long-time friend and business partner." [An updated version of the same report, webbed by CBC News, notes, amongst other additional facts, that "Black's lawyers objected repeatedly to prosecutor questions, especially those framing the two men as friends or describing the depth of their friendship."]
Added details are also in Paul Waldie's latest, written with Christie Blatchford and webbed by the Globe and Mail, about Mr. Radler and Mr. Black's first meeting. It also discloses that, when Eric Sussman asked Mr. Radler to specify what he pleaded guilty to, he answered "'I pleaded guilty to fraud. To taking money from Hollinger International in circumstances that were not allowed.'"
CTV NewsNet has also aired an updated report from Mr. Akin at 3 PM ET. He related the story of how Mr. Radler started off ownership of the Sherbrooke Record: laying off 40% of the staff. Mr. Black was "the public face" of the two. The prosecution wants to paint a picture of the two as "inseparable." Mr. Akin also reported that the plea agreement is contingent upon Mr. Radler being both "truthful" and "helpful" to the prosecution. If he's discredited, in other words, his sentence might be upped.
A report by Mary Vallis, webbed by Global National, covers the same subject too, but relates that Mr. Black "stared into his own hands as Radler passed." The Reuters report, by Andrew Stern and James Kelleher, adds a detail about Mr. Radler's initial testimony: when asked by Eric Sussman how "'major financial and business decisions [were] made'" back in those days, Mr. Radler replied, "'They were jointly made'". It also describes Mr. Radler as appearing, while on the stand, "rumpled and wispy-haired, frequently mumbling. He was told to speak up."
(As Mark Steyn notes below, Mr. Radler will probably testify later that decisions were always made jointly until the two split apart, which would cover the time of the transactions covered by the indictment.)
According to the latest report by Havard Gould, broadcast by CBC Newsworld at 4 PM ET, Mr. Radler's testimony is proceeding at a "glacial pace" because the prosecution is going out of its way to show how close the two were as partners.
The report from Stephanie Kirchgaessner of FT.com, as webbed by MSNBC.com, has a third version of that "not allowed" quote: "'I [pleaded] guilty to fraud . . . to taking money from Hollinger International . . . in certain senses that were not allowed,' Mr Radler said, in response to questions from the chief prosecutor in the case, Eric Sussman, on his 2005 plea agreement. "
Reuters' latest report, webbed by KPLC7.com, has details on some of Mr. Radler's afternoon testimony at the bottom of it, which continues with the history of his and Mr. Black's partnership (in the colloquial sense) as their publishing empire grew through the 1970s and '80s.
----------
Mark Steyn's own take on the beginning of Mr. Radler's testimony ends with: "The prosecution are evidently trying to play this as a classical tragedy - the seeds of Conrad Black's downfall were sown in the fatal character flaws he demonstrated in rural Quebec nearly 40 years ago. It makes a change from arguments over auditing advice."
(On the lighter side, CNN has reported that Conrad Black is sharing a counsel with singer R. Kelly. It also reports that the judge scheduled to hear the case, Vincent Gaughan, "fell off a ladder at home, sending him to the hospital with multiple fractures." That accident is something I can relate to, having been through the same ordeal at the end of September, 2005.)
Monday's anticipation
On BNN, there was an interview with Mark Zauderer, aired at approx. 12:15 PM ET. Mr. Black and Mr. Radler have worked together for a very long time, and there’s “little dispute” of how close they were. According to Csr. Zauderer, Mr. Radler could inflict a “mortal wound” on the defendant's case. He believes that the plea agreement was a shrewd deal on Mr. Radler’s part. If Mr. Radler's testimony strays significantly from what he had told the government, the government can nullify the plea agreement. If his testimony doesn’t salvage the prosecution's case, then it’s “possible” that the plea agreement will not be nullified, but it's “not likely,” as Csr. Zauderer said. It’s also “not likely” that Mr. Radler’s testimony will collapse, as the governemnt is normally sure of the value of testimony exchanged for a plea agreement.
ABC7 Chicago has webbed a brief report on Mr. Radler's appearance too. More detailed is Paul Waldie's updated report in the Globe and Mail, which relates that Mr. Radler and the prosecutors have spent "days" preparing for this day.
Romina Maurino also has written a report, webbed by 570 News. It mentions this morning's testimony, which was not given by Mr. Radler but by Robert Musar. "Prosecutors were trying to show Musur's firm, KPMG, was never asked to assess disputed fees paid to Black's co-defendants in a 2000 deal with CanWest Global Communications... or any other deals." There's no word on any cross-examination of Mr. Musar. The report notes that Conrad Black "appeared relaxed and confident entering the downtown court Monday, smiling as he followed his wife Barbara Amiel Black, daughter Alana Black and son James Black into the courtroom." It also notes that Dominick Dunne and Peter C. Newman are back in that same courtroom.
CBC News had an interview with Havard Gould, the CBC reporter covering the trial, aired on Newsworld shortly after 1 PM. According to Mr. Gould, Mr. Radler didn’t talk to reporters when he arrived, and it's easy to understand why. He’s testifying against his former friend and partner, and is a “self-admitted crook.” Conrad Black, when arriving, didn’t speak to the media either, but (as Ms. Maurino herself noted) he seemed cheerful when he entered the courtroom. Mr. Black might get 20-25 years, in Mr. Gould's estimate, if the jury believes Mr. Radler's direct testimony, but if they don’t, he might walk. Mr. Radler can testify that there was in fact a scheme, and this part of his testimony will be at its heart.
ABC7 Chicago has webbed a brief report on Mr. Radler's appearance too. More detailed is Paul Waldie's updated report in the Globe and Mail, which relates that Mr. Radler and the prosecutors have spent "days" preparing for this day.
Romina Maurino also has written a report, webbed by 570 News. It mentions this morning's testimony, which was not given by Mr. Radler but by Robert Musar. "Prosecutors were trying to show Musur's firm, KPMG, was never asked to assess disputed fees paid to Black's co-defendants in a 2000 deal with CanWest Global Communications... or any other deals." There's no word on any cross-examination of Mr. Musar. The report notes that Conrad Black "appeared relaxed and confident entering the downtown court Monday, smiling as he followed his wife Barbara Amiel Black, daughter Alana Black and son James Black into the courtroom." It also notes that Dominick Dunne and Peter C. Newman are back in that same courtroom.
CBC News had an interview with Havard Gould, the CBC reporter covering the trial, aired on Newsworld shortly after 1 PM. According to Mr. Gould, Mr. Radler didn’t talk to reporters when he arrived, and it's easy to understand why. He’s testifying against his former friend and partner, and is a “self-admitted crook.” Conrad Black, when arriving, didn’t speak to the media either, but (as Ms. Maurino herself noted) he seemed cheerful when he entered the courtroom. Mr. Black might get 20-25 years, in Mr. Gould's estimate, if the jury believes Mr. Radler's direct testimony, but if they don’t, he might walk. Mr. Radler can testify that there was in fact a scheme, and this part of his testimony will be at its heart.
Media Roundup: Salvage Operation
The media reports on the Conrad Black trial are warming up for what, as of now, will be the testimony of the crucial witness for the prosecution - David Radler:
1. From CTV News, an anticipatory report that quotes, at length, trial lawyer Steve Skurka's assessment of what the prosecution needs to hear from David Radler on the stand to salvage their case. There's also an assessment from BNN reporter Amanda Lang, who compares watching the trial to a tennis game: "'The prosecution presents a witness, and it seems as though they've presented a pretty good case and then the defence gets up and eviscerates them...'"
2. The final item of the New York Times' "Looking Ahead" business column is a note on Mr. Radler's testimony.
3. A report by Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail spells out what Mr. Radler's line of testimony will be, after noting that they need him to salvage their case: "Prosecutors have said that Mr. Radler will tell the jury that the plan was simple. As Hollinger sold off newspapers in the late 1990s, they knew the management fee would have to drop. To make up the difference, the men inserted themselves into non-competition agreements signed as part of the newspaper sales and then pocketed payments associated with those agreements." It also contains a brief bio of the partnership between Mr. Radler and Conrad Black.
4. Canoe Money has a CP report that notes, "Experts say Radler's testimony will start bringing the prosecution's case into sharper focus."
5. The Ottawa Citizen has webbed a report from Andrew Stern (of Reuters) and Mary Vallis (of CanWest News) which concurs with the analysts' consensus by passing along the assessment that Mr. Radler's testimony "will likely make or break the criminal case against Lord Black and three fellow executives." It also notes that the defense has moved to have Mr. Radler's grand-jury testimony ruled inadmissible.
6. Peter Worthington is back on the trial beat after a long hiatus of his own. His latest column, webbed by the Calgary Sun, also concurs with the consensus that Mr. Radler is now the prosecution's salvage witness, and suggests watching for Eddie Greenspan's cross-examination of Mr. Radler. It ends with: "If Black gets off, does the sweetheart plea bargain sentence still hold for Radler? How credible is his evidence? He's lied before, might he lie again?"
7. An article from Theresa Tedesco of the National Post labels Mr. Radler as a "modern-day Brutus" and reports that there is much anticipation amongst the defense team "at the prospect of gruelling cross-examinations" of the prosecution's star witness. It notes that the defense will take two tacks: one, that David Radler is a Benedict Arnold; two, that he ran the U.S. operations. (Much fireworking is, of course, expected once the cross-examination start.)
8. From Rick Westhead of the Toronto Star, a report that starts by noting that Mr. Radler, if he does an especially good job, may wind up serving less than a 29-month sentence, and later notes that there is a precedent for such reduction, as Andrew Fastow got rewarded in such a way. It also quotes lawyer Mark Zauderer, who reviewed the plea agreement that Mr. Radler signed: "'Radler has the ability to put a dagger in Black's heart... The government has done everything it can do to make [testifying] attractive for him.'" It also notes that it's unlikely that Mr. Radler will actually serve more than a year in jail, parole standards being what they are.
9. Janet Whitman of the New York Post has a report that also points out the cruciality of Mr. Radler's testimony. Mr. Black himself is quoted in the article: "'It will be a vigorous cross-examination,' Black told The Post, with a smile."
10. A report aired on the CBC Morning News, with correspondent Havard Gould, describes Radler's appearance as offering a “moment of high drama” once he gets on the stand. Conrad Black and Mr. Radler stuck together at first, but the latter rolled in ’05 when confronted by the U.S. justice department. Mr. Gould's report quotes Peter C. Newman: Mr. Radler “couldn’t stand it” if he was sentenced for a long time. His evidence. Mr. Gould noted, is viewed as “vital,” or "crucial," to the prosecution's case, in large part because Mr. Black’s side has done better than expected. Mr. Radler is expected on the stand this afternoon.
CBC Morning News also had an interview with criminal defense lawyer Terry Campbell, aired at approximately 7:40 AM ET. According to Csr. Campbell, Mr. Radler is important because he has an “insider’s view,” which makes him unique as a prosecution witness. Presumably, he will testify about the relevant conversations he had had with Mr. Black. His testimony results from a plea bargain whose terms imply that the prosecution will seek a sentence of “10 to 14 years” for Mr. Black. The defense will claim that Mr. Radler is giving prejudicial testimony because of his reduced prison sentence – he could have gotten 10-14 years himself. The best-case scenario for the prosecution would be Radler sealing the case shut. He may be believed, or it may be believed that he's singing a tune that's merely getting him out of worse trouble. The testimony may take a full week once it starts. The holes in the prosecution's case case so far have not erased the possibility of fraud, but have shown that it's unlikely that defendants had any intent to defraud.
11. CBC News also has a webbed report on Mr. Radler's expected testimony, in which Mr. Gould is quoted from a report that was broadcast last night. Several experts are also quoted in it.
12. From BBC News, a report which notes that Mr. Radler's job for the prosecution is to prove intent; as specified above, Csr. Campbell had noted that the prosecution has failed to prove its case so far. From the BBC's report: "'Radler is going to have to be extremely specific about the conversations he had with the defendants and how they planned to get away with this,' said Hugh Totten, a Chicago attorney who is following the trial."
13. CityNews' report is entitled "Explosive Moment Reached In Conrad Black Trial." From it: "Radler knows where all the figurative bodies are buried, having worked side by side with Black for decades as they built up his Hollinger newspaper empire.... Prosecutors will paint both men as co-conspirators bent on cheating the company. The defence will attempt to point all the fingers solely at Black's old friend."
14. The Montreal Gazette has reposted a report by Reuters' Andrew Stern. It notes that Csr. Totten "has defended executives and is observing some of the trial in U.S. District Court," before quoting his assessment at length.
15. Amanda Lang was interviewed on BNN about the trial, which was aired at 8:15 AM ET. She said that there's "a couple of key things" that make his testimony "the heart of the case" for both prosecution and defense: how believable he will be; and, if the defense motions asking to strike most of his grand jury testimony for being speculative are successful, how much of his testimony that's relevant will be let in? The defense has filed another motion to keep Mr. Radler's $29 milion settlement with the SEC out of testimony. If Mr. Radler is believed by the jury, then Conrad Black and the other defendants are sunk. He also can destroy the defense' contention that he and Conrad Black were co-chiefs and that Mr. Black had nothing to do with negotiating the individual non-compete agreements; this argument "has not stood up well" anyway. Mr. Radler can also testify that Black agreed to his actions, regardless of how independently he acted. Watching Conrad Black's face during Radler's testimony probably won't reveal much.
16. From Bloomberg, a report by Thom Weidlich and Andrew Harris that sketches out the key points that Mr. Radler is expected to make when testifying under direct examination: "Radler will be the first witness who helped arrange the fees and received them. Prosecutors will try to use his insight as to whether efforts were made to hide the payments to sway the jury.... According to Radler, Black knew money was being stolen from Hollinger and often decided how much was to be taken. He claimed Black helped conceal the alleged scheme from the board." In its background section, it notes that Mr. Black and Mr. Radler are still partners in Horizon and Bradford (although they are not the two sole shareholders of those companies.)
----------
Mark Steyn's latest entry in his Maclean's trial blog also covers David Radler's imminent appearance on the witness stand. He notes that Mr. Radler has, so far, produced no documentation to prove his "it was obvious..." remarks in his grand jury testimony. An earlier, much longer, entry answers reader criticisms that he has read too much into the impugnment of the testimony of the audit committee members.
1. From CTV News, an anticipatory report that quotes, at length, trial lawyer Steve Skurka's assessment of what the prosecution needs to hear from David Radler on the stand to salvage their case. There's also an assessment from BNN reporter Amanda Lang, who compares watching the trial to a tennis game: "'The prosecution presents a witness, and it seems as though they've presented a pretty good case and then the defence gets up and eviscerates them...'"
2. The final item of the New York Times' "Looking Ahead" business column is a note on Mr. Radler's testimony.
3. A report by Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail spells out what Mr. Radler's line of testimony will be, after noting that they need him to salvage their case: "Prosecutors have said that Mr. Radler will tell the jury that the plan was simple. As Hollinger sold off newspapers in the late 1990s, they knew the management fee would have to drop. To make up the difference, the men inserted themselves into non-competition agreements signed as part of the newspaper sales and then pocketed payments associated with those agreements." It also contains a brief bio of the partnership between Mr. Radler and Conrad Black.
4. Canoe Money has a CP report that notes, "Experts say Radler's testimony will start bringing the prosecution's case into sharper focus."
5. The Ottawa Citizen has webbed a report from Andrew Stern (of Reuters) and Mary Vallis (of CanWest News) which concurs with the analysts' consensus by passing along the assessment that Mr. Radler's testimony "will likely make or break the criminal case against Lord Black and three fellow executives." It also notes that the defense has moved to have Mr. Radler's grand-jury testimony ruled inadmissible.
6. Peter Worthington is back on the trial beat after a long hiatus of his own. His latest column, webbed by the Calgary Sun, also concurs with the consensus that Mr. Radler is now the prosecution's salvage witness, and suggests watching for Eddie Greenspan's cross-examination of Mr. Radler. It ends with: "If Black gets off, does the sweetheart plea bargain sentence still hold for Radler? How credible is his evidence? He's lied before, might he lie again?"
7. An article from Theresa Tedesco of the National Post labels Mr. Radler as a "modern-day Brutus" and reports that there is much anticipation amongst the defense team "at the prospect of gruelling cross-examinations" of the prosecution's star witness. It notes that the defense will take two tacks: one, that David Radler is a Benedict Arnold; two, that he ran the U.S. operations. (Much fireworking is, of course, expected once the cross-examination start.)
8. From Rick Westhead of the Toronto Star, a report that starts by noting that Mr. Radler, if he does an especially good job, may wind up serving less than a 29-month sentence, and later notes that there is a precedent for such reduction, as Andrew Fastow got rewarded in such a way. It also quotes lawyer Mark Zauderer, who reviewed the plea agreement that Mr. Radler signed: "'Radler has the ability to put a dagger in Black's heart... The government has done everything it can do to make [testifying] attractive for him.'" It also notes that it's unlikely that Mr. Radler will actually serve more than a year in jail, parole standards being what they are.
9. Janet Whitman of the New York Post has a report that also points out the cruciality of Mr. Radler's testimony. Mr. Black himself is quoted in the article: "'It will be a vigorous cross-examination,' Black told The Post, with a smile."
10. A report aired on the CBC Morning News, with correspondent Havard Gould, describes Radler's appearance as offering a “moment of high drama” once he gets on the stand. Conrad Black and Mr. Radler stuck together at first, but the latter rolled in ’05 when confronted by the U.S. justice department. Mr. Gould's report quotes Peter C. Newman: Mr. Radler “couldn’t stand it” if he was sentenced for a long time. His evidence. Mr. Gould noted, is viewed as “vital,” or "crucial," to the prosecution's case, in large part because Mr. Black’s side has done better than expected. Mr. Radler is expected on the stand this afternoon.
CBC Morning News also had an interview with criminal defense lawyer Terry Campbell, aired at approximately 7:40 AM ET. According to Csr. Campbell, Mr. Radler is important because he has an “insider’s view,” which makes him unique as a prosecution witness. Presumably, he will testify about the relevant conversations he had had with Mr. Black. His testimony results from a plea bargain whose terms imply that the prosecution will seek a sentence of “10 to 14 years” for Mr. Black. The defense will claim that Mr. Radler is giving prejudicial testimony because of his reduced prison sentence – he could have gotten 10-14 years himself. The best-case scenario for the prosecution would be Radler sealing the case shut. He may be believed, or it may be believed that he's singing a tune that's merely getting him out of worse trouble. The testimony may take a full week once it starts. The holes in the prosecution's case case so far have not erased the possibility of fraud, but have shown that it's unlikely that defendants had any intent to defraud.
11. CBC News also has a webbed report on Mr. Radler's expected testimony, in which Mr. Gould is quoted from a report that was broadcast last night. Several experts are also quoted in it.
12. From BBC News, a report which notes that Mr. Radler's job for the prosecution is to prove intent; as specified above, Csr. Campbell had noted that the prosecution has failed to prove its case so far. From the BBC's report: "'Radler is going to have to be extremely specific about the conversations he had with the defendants and how they planned to get away with this,' said Hugh Totten, a Chicago attorney who is following the trial."
13. CityNews' report is entitled "Explosive Moment Reached In Conrad Black Trial." From it: "Radler knows where all the figurative bodies are buried, having worked side by side with Black for decades as they built up his Hollinger newspaper empire.... Prosecutors will paint both men as co-conspirators bent on cheating the company. The defence will attempt to point all the fingers solely at Black's old friend."
14. The Montreal Gazette has reposted a report by Reuters' Andrew Stern. It notes that Csr. Totten "has defended executives and is observing some of the trial in U.S. District Court," before quoting his assessment at length.
15. Amanda Lang was interviewed on BNN about the trial, which was aired at 8:15 AM ET. She said that there's "a couple of key things" that make his testimony "the heart of the case" for both prosecution and defense: how believable he will be; and, if the defense motions asking to strike most of his grand jury testimony for being speculative are successful, how much of his testimony that's relevant will be let in? The defense has filed another motion to keep Mr. Radler's $29 milion settlement with the SEC out of testimony. If Mr. Radler is believed by the jury, then Conrad Black and the other defendants are sunk. He also can destroy the defense' contention that he and Conrad Black were co-chiefs and that Mr. Black had nothing to do with negotiating the individual non-compete agreements; this argument "has not stood up well" anyway. Mr. Radler can also testify that Black agreed to his actions, regardless of how independently he acted. Watching Conrad Black's face during Radler's testimony probably won't reveal much.
16. From Bloomberg, a report by Thom Weidlich and Andrew Harris that sketches out the key points that Mr. Radler is expected to make when testifying under direct examination: "Radler will be the first witness who helped arrange the fees and received them. Prosecutors will try to use his insight as to whether efforts were made to hide the payments to sway the jury.... According to Radler, Black knew money was being stolen from Hollinger and often decided how much was to be taken. He claimed Black helped conceal the alleged scheme from the board." In its background section, it notes that Mr. Black and Mr. Radler are still partners in Horizon and Bradford (although they are not the two sole shareholders of those companies.)
----------
Mark Steyn's latest entry in his Maclean's trial blog also covers David Radler's imminent appearance on the witness stand. He notes that Mr. Radler has, so far, produced no documentation to prove his "it was obvious..." remarks in his grand jury testimony. An earlier, much longer, entry answers reader criticisms that he has read too much into the impugnment of the testimony of the audit committee members.
Sunday, May 6, 2007
The Anchor In The Special Committee Report
From a first glace, it's apparent that the "Report of Investigation by the Special Committee of the Board of Directors of Hollinger International Inc," known for brevity's sake as the Breeden Report, has anchored itself as a lawyer's brief, not as a research report. To see this, I'll quote the second paragraph of the "Introduction and Executive Summary" in full, and then modify the perspective by translating it into a contemporaneous hypothetical research report done by a (thankfully hypothetical) equity analyst for Ravelston Corp.
First, the quote:
Now, the modification:
When put in the second form, an experienced - real - securites analyst would be asking a few pertinent questions in his/her notebook:
1. Why would that writer have used a fudge phrase such as "aggregate cash" when he clearly means "revenue?" How much has Ravelston actually earned? What are its costs?
2. What relevance does the 92.5% metric have for the question of why Ravelston showed "negotiating excellence" in a purported "coup"? How does the revenue from Hollinger stack up against the revenue earned by comparable management-services companies? How about its profit margin?
3. Come to think of it, how does that part of Hollinger's Selling, General & Administrative expenses that's been "garnered" by Ravelston compare with all other companies in the same industry, not just the ones which this fellow would like us to see? If the adjusted S, G & A account of Hollinger Int'l. is comparatively low, then we'd better check to see who's stiffing whom.
The above technique is useful for ferreting out hype, or reverse hype. If your eye is caught by emotional language in a report, then changing the perspective (as I've done above) will help in discounting the believability of the original report.
NOTE: The Breeden report was ruled to be inadmissible as evidence by Judge St. Eve early on in the trial.
----------
Speaking of tendentiousness, there's another way in which it can be shown, by sketching together a hypothetical "Special Report" for Hollinger Int'l, that pushes similar buttons, for the time period in which Gordon Paris was the CEO:
First, the quote:
The Report chronicles events at Hollinger over the decade since it first became a U.S. public company in 1994. Hollinger is a publishing company, but the story of the last decade at Hollinger, which is the subject of this Report, is not about Hollinger’s valuable publishing assets or the quality of the staff at its many publications. Rather, this story is about how Hollinger was systematically manipulated and used by its controlling shareholders for their sole benefit, and in a manner that violated every concept of fiduciary duty. Not once or twice, but on dozens of occasions Hollinger was victimized by its controlling shareholders as they transferred to themselves and their affiliates more than $400 million in the last seven years. The aggregate cash taken by Hollinger’s former CEO Conrad M. Black and its former COO F. David Radler and their associates represented 95.2% of Hollinger’s entire adjusted net income during 1997-2003.
Now, the modification:
This report chronicles the coup executed by Ravelston Corp, over the last seven years. Ravelston is a management company that primarly provides executive services to Hollinger International. This story is not about the performance of Hollinger International. Rather, this story is about the negotiating excellence shown by Ravelston Corp, in a manner that shows how much money the company has garnered from its management contract with Hollinger Int'l. Through shrewd negotiation, Ravelston and its principal shareholders have acquired more than $400 million from Hollinger in the last seven years. The aggregate cash flowing in from Hollinger Int'l, to Ravelston and its principal shareholders represents 92.5% of Hollinger Int'l entire net income during 1997-2003!
When put in the second form, an experienced - real - securites analyst would be asking a few pertinent questions in his/her notebook:
1. Why would that writer have used a fudge phrase such as "aggregate cash" when he clearly means "revenue?" How much has Ravelston actually earned? What are its costs?
2. What relevance does the 92.5% metric have for the question of why Ravelston showed "negotiating excellence" in a purported "coup"? How does the revenue from Hollinger stack up against the revenue earned by comparable management-services companies? How about its profit margin?
3. Come to think of it, how does that part of Hollinger's Selling, General & Administrative expenses that's been "garnered" by Ravelston compare with all other companies in the same industry, not just the ones which this fellow would like us to see? If the adjusted S, G & A account of Hollinger Int'l. is comparatively low, then we'd better check to see who's stiffing whom.
The above technique is useful for ferreting out hype, or reverse hype. If your eye is caught by emotional language in a report, then changing the perspective (as I've done above) will help in discounting the believability of the original report.
NOTE: The Breeden report was ruled to be inadmissible as evidence by Judge St. Eve early on in the trial.
----------
Speaking of tendentiousness, there's another way in which it can be shown, by sketching together a hypothetical "Special Report" for Hollinger Int'l, that pushes similar buttons, for the time period in which Gordon Paris was the CEO:
With regard to the second re-perspectivizing, here's a interesting question: had a full anti-Paris 'report', written in the same style as the snippet above, been: published straight, without calling any attention to any lawyer's tricks in it; circulated generally; and, treated with the respect that the Breeden Report itself has enjoyed, would Gordon Paris have grounds to sue the author(s) of it for defamation?From 2004 to 2006, Hollinger International was the victim of pervasive nest-feathering by now-ex-CEO, Gordon Paris, ousted as of November 15, 2006. While (note the metric that's being pulled out of the hat) Hollinger Int'l's operating income was negative $11.011 million during Paris' first year as CEO, he nevertheless snaffled $3.5 million in salary alone during that year. In three years, Paris extracted $7.5 million during a time when Hollinger Inc's aggregate operating losses were over $56 million, with the most egregious loss being in 2006, when he finally was maneuvered into accepting a salary cut. (I got this figure by adding together the operating losses at Hollinger Inc, now Sun-Times Media Group, from this annual financials data for the company. Note how I have sneakily not adjusted for non-recurring items, which I could sneakily explain away by writing, "This figure doesn't adjust for non-recurring losses or gains in operating income" in an attached footnote and breaking it down later in the report.)
Paris was well-compensated, indeed. But for what? His time as CEO saw the stock price halved, at a time when the S & P rose more than 25%. The dividend, stopped later, was meager compensation indeed for the stockholders, who suffered a capital loss of approximately 50% of their investment, and an opportunity loss of 60%, calculated conservatively (yes, the use of the word "conservatively" is an added bit of boilerplate)...
Media Roundup: Preparing For Radler
The stories on the Conrad Black trial webbed overnight and today are concentrating upon the impending appearance of one witness, that witness being David Radler, with one notable exception:
1. From LawFuel, an excerpt from a Times article, which contains a quick intro to Mr. Radler's role in the trial.
2. The Toronto Star's Jennifer Wells has a much longer profile on Mr. Radler, focusing upon his days as the Chicago Sun-Times' publisher and his brief, but to be recurrent, role as proprietor of a group of small-town American newspapers. It also includes a brief recap of his and Conrad Black's early days at Sterling.
3. The New York Post's "On The Money" column has a recap of the kick-out of Tom Bower from the courtroom. He, according to the ruling, was "showing disrespect for a U.S. Marshal."
4. From Andrew Stern of Reuters, an article on what Mr. Radler is expected to testify about, with this assessment of what he has to bring to the witness stand: "'Without Radler, they can't prove intent,' said a lawyer involved in the case who requested anonymity." It ends with an analysis of why Mr. Radler has become so crucial to the prosecution's case.
5. A CP report from Canoe Money quotes three experts, who also explain why Mr. Radler's testimony is going to be crucial.
6. From Michael Sneed of the Chicago Sun-Times, an anecdote which features a late-night raid, by "hotel security," of Black's hotel room - Alana Black's.
------------
Three columns, two of which mention Conrad Black and the trial only in passing; the third focuses upon the fall of an earlier witness, James Thompson, in the context of business or management stars who went nova:
1. Mary Mitchell mentions that R. Kelly, the R&B singer indicted with 14 counts of child-pornography-related charges, has retained Edward Genson to defend him. Her column wonders why Mr. Kelly would be invited to the premiere of the movie The Color Purple when under indictment for those charges.
2. Phil Rosenthal's column in the Chicago Tribune discusses the expected fate of the Chicago Sun-Times under its new ownership. He claims that the proprietorship of Conrad Black and David Radler was less memorable that that of their predecessor, Rupert Murdoch, who's already gotten some reporters with the Wall Street Journal running scared.
3. Another Tribune columnist, David Griesing, after describing how Mr. Thompson's star is faring, has a round-of of other star directors, or CEOs, whose reputations went nova after scandals erupted on their watch: Clark Clifford, ex- of Band of Credit and Commerce International; Robert Jaedicke, cindered by Enron's implosion; Harry Stonecipher, who was done in by an office affair; and, of course, Paul Wolfowitz, who hasn't gone to cinder as of yet. His column, after supplying context to the phenomenon, returns to the image created by Mr. Thompson's recent testimony. It ends with a mention of the root cause, supplied by former Enron lead prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, of so many directors getting caught short these days: "overboarding," or sitting on too many boards, resulting in too little time devoted to each responsibility.
1. From LawFuel, an excerpt from a Times article, which contains a quick intro to Mr. Radler's role in the trial.
2. The Toronto Star's Jennifer Wells has a much longer profile on Mr. Radler, focusing upon his days as the Chicago Sun-Times' publisher and his brief, but to be recurrent, role as proprietor of a group of small-town American newspapers. It also includes a brief recap of his and Conrad Black's early days at Sterling.
3. The New York Post's "On The Money" column has a recap of the kick-out of Tom Bower from the courtroom. He, according to the ruling, was "showing disrespect for a U.S. Marshal."
4. From Andrew Stern of Reuters, an article on what Mr. Radler is expected to testify about, with this assessment of what he has to bring to the witness stand: "'Without Radler, they can't prove intent,' said a lawyer involved in the case who requested anonymity." It ends with an analysis of why Mr. Radler has become so crucial to the prosecution's case.
5. A CP report from Canoe Money quotes three experts, who also explain why Mr. Radler's testimony is going to be crucial.
6. From Michael Sneed of the Chicago Sun-Times, an anecdote which features a late-night raid, by "hotel security," of Black's hotel room - Alana Black's.
------------
Three columns, two of which mention Conrad Black and the trial only in passing; the third focuses upon the fall of an earlier witness, James Thompson, in the context of business or management stars who went nova:
1. Mary Mitchell mentions that R. Kelly, the R&B singer indicted with 14 counts of child-pornography-related charges, has retained Edward Genson to defend him. Her column wonders why Mr. Kelly would be invited to the premiere of the movie The Color Purple when under indictment for those charges.
2. Phil Rosenthal's column in the Chicago Tribune discusses the expected fate of the Chicago Sun-Times under its new ownership. He claims that the proprietorship of Conrad Black and David Radler was less memorable that that of their predecessor, Rupert Murdoch, who's already gotten some reporters with the Wall Street Journal running scared.
3. Another Tribune columnist, David Griesing, after describing how Mr. Thompson's star is faring, has a round-of of other star directors, or CEOs, whose reputations went nova after scandals erupted on their watch: Clark Clifford, ex- of Band of Credit and Commerce International; Robert Jaedicke, cindered by Enron's implosion; Harry Stonecipher, who was done in by an office affair; and, of course, Paul Wolfowitz, who hasn't gone to cinder as of yet. His column, after supplying context to the phenomenon, returns to the image created by Mr. Thompson's recent testimony. It ends with a mention of the root cause, supplied by former Enron lead prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, of so many directors getting caught short these days: "overboarding," or sitting on too many boards, resulting in too little time devoted to each responsibility.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)