The first segment of tonight's episode of The Verdict dealt with the Conrad Black trial - specifically, how the prosecution has fared now that they're about to rest. The three guests were jury expert Paul Lisnek, former prosecutor Ted Chung, and trial-watching regular Steve Skurka.
Csr. Skurka assigned a “C- to D+” grade to the prosecution, because: no victims were presented; the weakness of the audit committee testimony; the general lack of credibility of their witnesses. The only credible one was Richard Burt.
Csr. Chung went easier on the prosecutors. He said that the prosecution made their case “intelligible” but the witnesses were disappointing, especially David Radler. His assessment was that they did an “adequate” or “decent” job. When asked by Ms. Todd about the assumption that the non-compete payments would have ended up in Hollinger International’s treasury being not proven, he conceded that they may have made a mistake by not providing any victims.
Csr. Lisnek stepped in by noting that a victim is not needed. All the prosecution has to establish is that the defendants violated the law. Ms. Todd asked, though, how will it be determined what specific interpretation of the law did they violate, if any? Csr. Skurka noted, at that point, that the prosecution pulled back in the middle of the trial, and conceded that the CanWest non-compete payments were legitimate. Her question got the answer that the judge will determine what the relevant law is, and reveal it in her instructions to the jury.
When further asked by Ms. Todd about Conrad Black going on the stand, Csr. Lisnek replied that there wasn't a chance of it. Csr. Skurka added that Mr. Black is an “undisciplined witness.” He's too loose a cannon to give reliable testimony in his own defense.
Csr. Chung ventured that the jurors would like to see Mr. Black on the stand, but it’s not necessary for the defense's case. Csr. Skurka observed that they have already heard Mr. Black under a kind of “cross-examination” by the Hollinger Int'l shareholders at the 2001 and '02 annual meetings. Csr. Lisnek noted that jurors will forgive mistakes, but they're not likely to forgive arrogance.
After quoting from Leo J. Strine's 2004 decision, Ms. Todd asked Csr. Chung what the prosecution would cross-examine Mr. Black about. He replied that they can ask about almost anything, and can batter away as much as they like. They can ask questions based on any document that’s been introduced in the trial. Csr. Skurka added that the prosecution can also ask about any of Mr. Black’s comments to the media.
Ms. Todd then mentioned that Joan Maida's testimony is coming up. Csr. Skurka said that she’ll provide an “innocent explanation” of the removal of the boxes. Donald Trump may be the next witness.
Csr. Lisnek himself said that celebrities have an initial aura, but they tend to relax into regular witnessing and are seen by the jury as only that. There is a problem, though, with a celebrity being brought in as a character witness. Parading celebrities is “dangerous.” Look at what happened to Jim Thompson….
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
The Box Show
Paul Waldie has reported, in the Globe and Mail, that the jury has now seen the security-camera video. It was presented with accompanying testimony from the night guard at 10 Toronto, Shahab Mahmood. He testified that "he had been told that no boxes were to leave the building without approval of a court-appointed inspector.... Mr. Mahmood [further testified] that security staff had also been told not to confront executives who removed documents but to make a note of it. Mr. Mahmood said that, on a video monitor, he saw Lord Black take out the boxes but he did not move to stop him."
Mr. Waldie added to his article in a BNN Interview, aired at 1:55 PM ET. According to Mr. Waldie, Conrad Black's explanation for the removal of the boxes is comprised of these three items: he had been evicted from the Hollinger Inc. head office just before he took them; the boxes contained personal items; and, there was nothing in the boxes that's relevant to the case. The jurors have already heard from the two security guards who were on duty during the day (and night) of Mr. Black's removal of the boxes. The prosecution only got the boxes a few weeks ago, but they did have an inventory of their contents before the trial began. That inventory was entered into the record. They have a couple of more witnesses to go: a tax expert and a real-estate agent. The defense may begin tomorrow, but more probably Thursday. It isn't certain as to who the first defense witness will be, nor is the order of witnesses certain. Each defendant can call them one by one, so one defendant doesn't have to run through his entire list before the other one calls his first.
Andrew Stern of Reuters has a report that gets to the nub of the obstruction-of-justice charge and Conrad Black's defense against it: "Prosecutors say the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission alerted Black's attorney on May 19 that Black would be served with a written request to surrender certain records for the investigation that was under way at the time. Prosecutors said the notice was served on Black's lawyer on May 20. The defence has said it did not receive it or was unaware of the SEC request." The report also has excerpts from the direct examination itself, and notes that the lawyer for Mr. Black asking the questions is Marc Martin.
An updated version of the same report has, on its second page, an excerpt from the testimony of Monique Delorme, a former comptroller at Hollinger Inc., who testified that "it was her understanding that 'a Hollinger Inc. employee could not alone authorize the removal of documents' without the inspectors giving their approval." A Bloomberg report, by Joe Schneider and Andrew Harris, has more from her testimony, including: Ernst and Young's insistence that the boxes remain in the office; and, Hollinger Inc's president, Donald Vale, okaying their removal because, he believed, there were only personal items in them.
An article from Medill Reports has details not only on defense objections to the prosecution's obstruction-of-justice charge, it also excerpts the testimony of the prosecution witness after Mr. Mahmood and Ms. Delorme, the "real estate appraisal expert John Miller, of consulting firm Miller Samuel Inc., to give detail Healy was not qualified to give." His figure for the apartment, minus renovations, was $5.2 million. He refused to bend under cross-examination, according to the report. It also notes that "Judge Amy St. Eve reminded the jury that Black is not charged with violating any Canadian court order or Hollinger policy, relating to any removal of items by Black from the company’s Toronto office. "
A report that covers similar ground, by Mary Vallis and webbed by Canada.com, notes that the cross-examination of Mr. Miller included asking him how much the prosecution was paying for his consulting services, and the cross-examination of Ms. Delorme had her admitting that she didn't know what the contents of the boxes were. It also notes that "[t]he prosecution admitted into evidence some of the contents of the controversial boxes late Tuesday, including invoices for expensive purchases Black allegedly made with money from non-compete payments at the heart of the case."
The report from Associated Press, webbed by the International Herald-Tribune, relates that Mr. Miller testified that the renovated apartment had a fair market value of $8.5 million. It also notes that Csr. Genson, while cross-examining Mr. Miller, asked if it was true that the $3 million plus the $4.3 million meant that Mr. Black would "'have $7.3 million... in the apartment,'" a figure close to Mr. Miller's appraisal. He answered, "'From a mathematical standpoint'"
And finally, a much briefer report from the Times Online, focuses upon the 13 boxes and the testimony of Mr. Mahmood.
----------
A post by Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, points to the vagaries inherent in the difference betwen the civil law and the criminal law, revealed by a story about convicted inside trader Joseph Nacchio suing for Qwest to pay his legal bills. Mr. Bell's entry also reveals that Conrad Black had a better outcome when in Delaware court last year, benefitting from a ruling that obliged Hollinger International to pay his legal bills.
(I vaguely remember reading stories that revealed things going a little weird in this area, such as the possily urban-legendary story of a burglar suing his victim for a tort resulting from said burgler being injured in the course of his burgling on the victim's property. I can think of a way that things in this nexus could get a little weirder, such as an accused criminal suing a prosecutor for "defamatory" press conferences - or vice-versa, for that matter.)
Mr. Waldie added to his article in a BNN Interview, aired at 1:55 PM ET. According to Mr. Waldie, Conrad Black's explanation for the removal of the boxes is comprised of these three items: he had been evicted from the Hollinger Inc. head office just before he took them; the boxes contained personal items; and, there was nothing in the boxes that's relevant to the case. The jurors have already heard from the two security guards who were on duty during the day (and night) of Mr. Black's removal of the boxes. The prosecution only got the boxes a few weeks ago, but they did have an inventory of their contents before the trial began. That inventory was entered into the record. They have a couple of more witnesses to go: a tax expert and a real-estate agent. The defense may begin tomorrow, but more probably Thursday. It isn't certain as to who the first defense witness will be, nor is the order of witnesses certain. Each defendant can call them one by one, so one defendant doesn't have to run through his entire list before the other one calls his first.
Andrew Stern of Reuters has a report that gets to the nub of the obstruction-of-justice charge and Conrad Black's defense against it: "Prosecutors say the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission alerted Black's attorney on May 19 that Black would be served with a written request to surrender certain records for the investigation that was under way at the time. Prosecutors said the notice was served on Black's lawyer on May 20. The defence has said it did not receive it or was unaware of the SEC request." The report also has excerpts from the direct examination itself, and notes that the lawyer for Mr. Black asking the questions is Marc Martin.
An updated version of the same report has, on its second page, an excerpt from the testimony of Monique Delorme, a former comptroller at Hollinger Inc., who testified that "it was her understanding that 'a Hollinger Inc. employee could not alone authorize the removal of documents' without the inspectors giving their approval." A Bloomberg report, by Joe Schneider and Andrew Harris, has more from her testimony, including: Ernst and Young's insistence that the boxes remain in the office; and, Hollinger Inc's president, Donald Vale, okaying their removal because, he believed, there were only personal items in them.
An article from Medill Reports has details not only on defense objections to the prosecution's obstruction-of-justice charge, it also excerpts the testimony of the prosecution witness after Mr. Mahmood and Ms. Delorme, the "real estate appraisal expert John Miller, of consulting firm Miller Samuel Inc., to give detail Healy was not qualified to give." His figure for the apartment, minus renovations, was $5.2 million. He refused to bend under cross-examination, according to the report. It also notes that "Judge Amy St. Eve reminded the jury that Black is not charged with violating any Canadian court order or Hollinger policy, relating to any removal of items by Black from the company’s Toronto office. "
A report that covers similar ground, by Mary Vallis and webbed by Canada.com, notes that the cross-examination of Mr. Miller included asking him how much the prosecution was paying for his consulting services, and the cross-examination of Ms. Delorme had her admitting that she didn't know what the contents of the boxes were. It also notes that "[t]he prosecution admitted into evidence some of the contents of the controversial boxes late Tuesday, including invoices for expensive purchases Black allegedly made with money from non-compete payments at the heart of the case."
The report from Associated Press, webbed by the International Herald-Tribune, relates that Mr. Miller testified that the renovated apartment had a fair market value of $8.5 million. It also notes that Csr. Genson, while cross-examining Mr. Miller, asked if it was true that the $3 million plus the $4.3 million meant that Mr. Black would "'have $7.3 million... in the apartment,'" a figure close to Mr. Miller's appraisal. He answered, "'From a mathematical standpoint'"
And finally, a much briefer report from the Times Online, focuses upon the 13 boxes and the testimony of Mr. Mahmood.
----------
A post by Douglas Bell, in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, points to the vagaries inherent in the difference betwen the civil law and the criminal law, revealed by a story about convicted inside trader Joseph Nacchio suing for Qwest to pay his legal bills. Mr. Bell's entry also reveals that Conrad Black had a better outcome when in Delaware court last year, benefitting from a ruling that obliged Hollinger International to pay his legal bills.
(I vaguely remember reading stories that revealed things going a little weird in this area, such as the possily urban-legendary story of a burglar suing his victim for a tort resulting from said burgler being injured in the course of his burgling on the victim's property. I can think of a way that things in this nexus could get a little weirder, such as an accused criminal suing a prosecutor for "defamatory" press conferences - or vice-versa, for that matter.)
Media Roundup: Wrapping It Up (Prelude)
The few media reports, webbed overnight and this morning, on the Conrad Black trial are centred on the looming end of the prosecution's case - with one exception:
1. From CBC News, a Canadian Press item noting that the prosecution should rest tomorrow, after calling two more witnesses, and that the defense should call its first witness tomorrow.
2. Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail also has an article on the same wrap-up, but it starts off with an announcement by the prosecution that a full day will be needed by them for the closing argument, expected to be given in late June. It also summarizes the gist of the obstruction-of-justice charge.
3. Also from the Globe, an item in the blog "Nobody's Business" about the Canadian version of spelling "centre" being entered into the trial, along with evidence of an arithmetical mistake.
----------
There's an article posted in Harper's Online which points to the fact that David Frum had received, for four months' consulting work, the equivalent of $50,000/quarter, or $16,666.67 per month from Hollinger Int'l bak in late 2000. Mr. Frum, in his reply to the charge of resultant bias, said that he only got market rate for services performed, and that he and his wife have both known the Blacks for decades.
(Actually, I've read Mr. Frum's pro-Black posts in his blog; if any bias is evident, it's in plugging Peter Worthington's column. He did disclose that Mr. Worthington did previously give Mr. Frum his stepdaugher; she's now Mr. Frum's wife.)
1. From CBC News, a Canadian Press item noting that the prosecution should rest tomorrow, after calling two more witnesses, and that the defense should call its first witness tomorrow.
2. Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail also has an article on the same wrap-up, but it starts off with an announcement by the prosecution that a full day will be needed by them for the closing argument, expected to be given in late June. It also summarizes the gist of the obstruction-of-justice charge.
3. Also from the Globe, an item in the blog "Nobody's Business" about the Canadian version of spelling "centre" being entered into the trial, along with evidence of an arithmetical mistake.
----------
There's an article posted in Harper's Online which points to the fact that David Frum had received, for four months' consulting work, the equivalent of $50,000/quarter, or $16,666.67 per month from Hollinger Int'l bak in late 2000. Mr. Frum, in his reply to the charge of resultant bias, said that he only got market rate for services performed, and that he and his wife have both known the Blacks for decades.
(Actually, I've read Mr. Frum's pro-Black posts in his blog; if any bias is evident, it's in plugging Peter Worthington's column. He did disclose that Mr. Worthington did previously give Mr. Frum his stepdaugher; she's now Mr. Frum's wife.)
Monday, May 28, 2007
Media Roundup: Forward Looking
As it is Memorial Day in the United States, attention has drifted away from the Conrad Black trial. The media reports on it, webbed overnight and today, focus on the upcoming turn of the defense:
1. The Hamilton Spectator has webbed an abridged version of Romina Maurino's latest report, which sketches out the most likely defense strategy.
2. From the Toronto Star's David Olive, a column that contains a discussion of the defense strategy in the third item of three, entitled "Perry Mason 101." Mr. Olive takes the prosecution to task for "inexpert witness preparation that has marked this trial's first seven weeks." In its last paragraph, Mr. Olive notes that Conrad Black's defense is taking shape already.
----------
The blog "Blamblog," by Brett Lamb, has an interesting photo-essay about a long Toronto walk he and his wife took: westward from Sheppard and Don Mills to Sheppard and Yonge; south to Yonge and Lawrence Ave; east to Bayview; and then up to Conrad Black's estate, to give him flowers. Mr. Lamb says that he saw the couple drive out of their home while he was there (but he didn't get let in.)
You can try following along by using Yahoo! Canada Maps. (Don Mills is the next major street west - to the left - of the centre star in the linked-to map.) This second Yahoo! map has the street in which the estate itself is located.
[I got the Bamblog link from this post in the blog "Small Dead Animals."]
Also, Mark Steyn discusses the possibility of calling one of the representatives of the major institutional shareholders of Hollinger Int'l during the time period covered by the indictment...and the risk of those institutions' own legal actions implying to the jury that the U.S. attorney's office picked on the wrong men.
1. The Hamilton Spectator has webbed an abridged version of Romina Maurino's latest report, which sketches out the most likely defense strategy.
2. From the Toronto Star's David Olive, a column that contains a discussion of the defense strategy in the third item of three, entitled "Perry Mason 101." Mr. Olive takes the prosecution to task for "inexpert witness preparation that has marked this trial's first seven weeks." In its last paragraph, Mr. Olive notes that Conrad Black's defense is taking shape already.
----------
The blog "Blamblog," by Brett Lamb, has an interesting photo-essay about a long Toronto walk he and his wife took: westward from Sheppard and Don Mills to Sheppard and Yonge; south to Yonge and Lawrence Ave; east to Bayview; and then up to Conrad Black's estate, to give him flowers. Mr. Lamb says that he saw the couple drive out of their home while he was there (but he didn't get let in.)
You can try following along by using Yahoo! Canada Maps. (Don Mills is the next major street west - to the left - of the centre star in the linked-to map.) This second Yahoo! map has the street in which the estate itself is located.
[I got the Bamblog link from this post in the blog "Small Dead Animals."]
Also, Mark Steyn discusses the possibility of calling one of the representatives of the major institutional shareholders of Hollinger Int'l during the time period covered by the indictment...and the risk of those institutions' own legal actions implying to the jury that the U.S. attorney's office picked on the wrong men.
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Media Roundup: Columnist Views
The media reports, webbed overnight and today, about the Conrad Black trial are still few in number. Most are columnist's pieces:
1. From the London Free Press, columnist Michelle Mandel discusses the portrayal by the prosecution of Conrad Black as the "Lord of Bling."
2. In her latest report, Janet Whitman of the New York Post has picked up on a point that a more partial journalist [guess who] is known for: "After 10 weeks of testimony and five key witnesses, prosecutors have yet to put one victim on the stand who would tell of being defrauded by this one-time press baron." After reviewing the inadequacies of the prosecution's case, she concludes: "While no one can accurately read how a jury is leaning, there's a palpable feeling in the courtroom that few are ready to convict Black. And the defense won't begin its case until later this week."
3. Another Sun Media columnist, Mark Bonokowski, discusses the connection between Conrad Black and recently murdered philanthropist Glen Davis: the latter's father, Nelson Davis. After a profile of the older Mr. Davis, which includes the note that his son was adopted by him, Mr. Bonokowski adds the life-changing event that turned the younger Mr. Davis into a philanthropist: a brush with death in a 1983 plane crash.
4. The latest from Romina Maurino, as webbed by Canoe Money, starts off with a forecast of the defense's strategy: arguing that the prosecution is attempting to criminalize normal business practice in the newspaper industry, or "that the embattled media mogul behaved like any other media executive when he took disputed payments and is in no way the criminal prosecutors have depicted." Her report quotes several experts, including one who notes that Mr. Black may come off better on the stand than expected because of how he's been anchored in the minds of the jury. Conrad Black's already been portrayed by the prosecution as something close to the Devil incarnate, so merely acting like a normal witness would make him look quite credible by comparison.
----------
The Chicago Sun-Times has a profile of another well-known figure in trouble with the law in Chicago: R. Kelly, who has also secured Edward Genson as defense counsel. It centres on Mr. Kelly's lyrics.
If...er, "exotic" opinion pieces are your cup of Sunday tea, then the Lebanese paper Dar Al-Hayat has a piece of writing you might be interested in poking through. It appears under the byline of a fellow by the name of Jihad el-Khazen, and it's about the recent decline and fall of the neoconservative movement. Both Conrad and Barbara Black have a mention in it, to wit: "And let's not forget the trial and humiliation of Conrad Black, former owner of the Telegraph group and the fourth husband of the Likudnik witch Barbara Amiel. May he rot in jail and may she lose all her ill-gotten jewellery along with her teeth."
To get back to something approximating normalcy, Mark Steyn watchers will be interested to know that he's placed a column in the Sun-Times. No, it has nothing to do with either Conrad Black or any criminal trial (although he does linger on an unusual paternity suit.)
1. From the London Free Press, columnist Michelle Mandel discusses the portrayal by the prosecution of Conrad Black as the "Lord of Bling."
2. In her latest report, Janet Whitman of the New York Post has picked up on a point that a more partial journalist [guess who] is known for: "After 10 weeks of testimony and five key witnesses, prosecutors have yet to put one victim on the stand who would tell of being defrauded by this one-time press baron." After reviewing the inadequacies of the prosecution's case, she concludes: "While no one can accurately read how a jury is leaning, there's a palpable feeling in the courtroom that few are ready to convict Black. And the defense won't begin its case until later this week."
3. Another Sun Media columnist, Mark Bonokowski, discusses the connection between Conrad Black and recently murdered philanthropist Glen Davis: the latter's father, Nelson Davis. After a profile of the older Mr. Davis, which includes the note that his son was adopted by him, Mr. Bonokowski adds the life-changing event that turned the younger Mr. Davis into a philanthropist: a brush with death in a 1983 plane crash.
4. The latest from Romina Maurino, as webbed by Canoe Money, starts off with a forecast of the defense's strategy: arguing that the prosecution is attempting to criminalize normal business practice in the newspaper industry, or "that the embattled media mogul behaved like any other media executive when he took disputed payments and is in no way the criminal prosecutors have depicted." Her report quotes several experts, including one who notes that Mr. Black may come off better on the stand than expected because of how he's been anchored in the minds of the jury. Conrad Black's already been portrayed by the prosecution as something close to the Devil incarnate, so merely acting like a normal witness would make him look quite credible by comparison.
----------
The Chicago Sun-Times has a profile of another well-known figure in trouble with the law in Chicago: R. Kelly, who has also secured Edward Genson as defense counsel. It centres on Mr. Kelly's lyrics.
If...er, "exotic" opinion pieces are your cup of Sunday tea, then the Lebanese paper Dar Al-Hayat has a piece of writing you might be interested in poking through. It appears under the byline of a fellow by the name of Jihad el-Khazen, and it's about the recent decline and fall of the neoconservative movement. Both Conrad and Barbara Black have a mention in it, to wit: "And let's not forget the trial and humiliation of Conrad Black, former owner of the Telegraph group and the fourth husband of the Likudnik witch Barbara Amiel. May he rot in jail and may she lose all her ill-gotten jewellery along with her teeth."
To get back to something approximating normalcy, Mark Steyn watchers will be interested to know that he's placed a column in the Sun-Times. No, it has nothing to do with either Conrad Black or any criminal trial (although he does linger on an unusual paternity suit.)
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Media Roundup: Near Standstill
There are hardly any media stories, from overnight and today, to pass along - only two:
1. Susan Berger, as webbed by CBC News, recounts the week's events at the trial.
2. The Donald Trump connection got a one paragraph mention, as the first item, in the Observer's "The Week."
----------
In yesterday's intro to the media reports on the last bit of testimony for the week, Douglas Bell writes this about Lance Bloomfield's testimony: "After the continuing parade of reptiles equivocating their tortuous way around the truth, 'this ain’t right' sounds like the Gettysburg Address." He also is careful enough to note that Mr. Bloomfield merely packed the boxes into Mr. Black's secretary's car and then put them back in 10 Toronto. A later entry by him in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog focuses in on Judge St. Eve's recent rebuke of Mr. Black and ends with a punch line that reveals why Mr. Black's out-of-trial comments may be very relevant to his fate in the courtroom. A related entry by Patrick Gossage ventures that Conrad Black is losing the spin war in the courtroom itself.
Steve Skurka's latest entry in "The Crime Sheet" contains an anecdote, from his earlier days as a trial lawyer, which shows quite flatly why a trial attorney should never take any thing prima facie for granted.
1. Susan Berger, as webbed by CBC News, recounts the week's events at the trial.
2. The Donald Trump connection got a one paragraph mention, as the first item, in the Observer's "The Week."
----------
In yesterday's intro to the media reports on the last bit of testimony for the week, Douglas Bell writes this about Lance Bloomfield's testimony: "After the continuing parade of reptiles equivocating their tortuous way around the truth, 'this ain’t right' sounds like the Gettysburg Address." He also is careful enough to note that Mr. Bloomfield merely packed the boxes into Mr. Black's secretary's car and then put them back in 10 Toronto. A later entry by him in the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog focuses in on Judge St. Eve's recent rebuke of Mr. Black and ends with a punch line that reveals why Mr. Black's out-of-trial comments may be very relevant to his fate in the courtroom. A related entry by Patrick Gossage ventures that Conrad Black is losing the spin war in the courtroom itself.
Steve Skurka's latest entry in "The Crime Sheet" contains an anecdote, from his earlier days as a trial lawyer, which shows quite flatly why a trial attorney should never take any thing prima facie for granted.
Friday, May 25, 2007
"Squeeze Play" interview with Paul Waldie
Late this afternoon, there was a recap interview with Paul Waldie, on BNN's "Squeeze Play." (It's now broadbanded, and should be linked to all weekend. The link is on BNN's home page.) The interview began 40 minutes into the program, and lasted for ten minutes. It was prefaced by an excerpt from the recent CTV interview of Conrad Black with Seamus O’Reagan, about injustice through plea bargains exerted through government pressure, including property seizures.
Mr. Waldie estimated that the defense might only present their case for a couple of weeks once the prosecution rests, which they are still expected to do next Wednesday. Next week, the 13 boxes will be fully dealt with by the prosecution, before they rest. Those boxes are central to the obstruction-of-justice charge; only Conrad Black faces it. He removed them while there was an expected SEC impoundment on them and a then-present Canadian court order forbidding any removal of evidence from 10 Toronto. His defense is: the contents were personal property. He was obliged to remove them because of an eviction notice he faced.
There has been no "smoking gun" in the prosecution's case, but smoking guns are not typical in these cases. Each day, new pieces of the puzzle are introduced; the prosecution and defense are obliged to pull them together during closing arguments.
These charges have taken a real toll on Mr. Black, and on the lawyers. He’s still confident, though. The jurors are bored on “some days”. A defense lawyer that Mr. Waldie talked to said that about half of the jurors have decided one way, and about half the other way, with the leftovers undecided, as is typical in cases of this sort.
David Radler was effective in the first week of his testimony, and there was some sympathy for him because of the aggressive cross-examination he initially faced. Then, in week two of his testimony, he started to “weasel” on the stand, which drained the sympathy factor and may have impugned his credibility.
As far as the continual question of whether or not Conrad Black will take the stand in his own defense, Mr. Waldie opined that it may help him, but the jurors have heard him at the annual meetings.
Kevin O’Leary asked if the tape from those meetings was put in there as “bait” to get Mr. Black on the stand. Mr. Waldie answered that it was plausible. There’s been lots of strategizing amongst the trial lawyers.
There are lots of big names on the list of potential defense witnesses, but little indication that any of them will actually testify. When asked by Mr. O'Leary about the possibility that Mr. Radler may go to jail while Conrad Black walks, Mr. Waldie replied that the BellSouth case saw exactly that outcome. A guilty pleader went to jail while a not-guilty-pleader walked. (No more comparison needed, therefore, to Edward Doheny and Sen. Albert Fall.)
Mr. Waldie estimated that the defense might only present their case for a couple of weeks once the prosecution rests, which they are still expected to do next Wednesday. Next week, the 13 boxes will be fully dealt with by the prosecution, before they rest. Those boxes are central to the obstruction-of-justice charge; only Conrad Black faces it. He removed them while there was an expected SEC impoundment on them and a then-present Canadian court order forbidding any removal of evidence from 10 Toronto. His defense is: the contents were personal property. He was obliged to remove them because of an eviction notice he faced.
There has been no "smoking gun" in the prosecution's case, but smoking guns are not typical in these cases. Each day, new pieces of the puzzle are introduced; the prosecution and defense are obliged to pull them together during closing arguments.
These charges have taken a real toll on Mr. Black, and on the lawyers. He’s still confident, though. The jurors are bored on “some days”. A defense lawyer that Mr. Waldie talked to said that about half of the jurors have decided one way, and about half the other way, with the leftovers undecided, as is typical in cases of this sort.
David Radler was effective in the first week of his testimony, and there was some sympathy for him because of the aggressive cross-examination he initially faced. Then, in week two of his testimony, he started to “weasel” on the stand, which drained the sympathy factor and may have impugned his credibility.
As far as the continual question of whether or not Conrad Black will take the stand in his own defense, Mr. Waldie opined that it may help him, but the jurors have heard him at the annual meetings.
Kevin O’Leary asked if the tape from those meetings was put in there as “bait” to get Mr. Black on the stand. Mr. Waldie answered that it was plausible. There’s been lots of strategizing amongst the trial lawyers.
There are lots of big names on the list of potential defense witnesses, but little indication that any of them will actually testify. When asked by Mr. O'Leary about the possibility that Mr. Radler may go to jail while Conrad Black walks, Mr. Waldie replied that the BellSouth case saw exactly that outcome. A guilty pleader went to jail while a not-guilty-pleader walked. (No more comparison needed, therefore, to Edward Doheny and Sen. Albert Fall.)
Noise to signal ratio
The East Vacouver Republic has a Conrad Black-related two-fer today. The first story relates that Mr. Black and Izzy Asper both believed in media conspiracies against certain individuals, because they saw them from their CEO's chairs. The second one profiles recently-murdered philanthropist Glen Davis as very much the son of his father, former Argus chairman and Black ally Nelson Davis. The elder Davis was close to being Canada's richest man, largely through building up mining fortunes. The article concedes that the younger Mr. Davis was an environmentalist, 'tis true, but still one that was primarily interested in "conserving" the same stretch of Ontario land where mining fortunes have been made.
The Republic's masthead, found at the bottom of its home page, says that it aims to cover current events without bias or doggishness. It is an alternative newspaper, and shows hints of the radical worldview that's par for the woods there. The above two articles show something about where the radical worldview comes from.
To put it bluntly, many radical notions come from (at times distorted) views from the upper crust itself. Add a few Telephone-Game-style iterations and what was offhand talk [or bragging] in the plush set becomes a plank of the radical worldview.
A lot of the radical worldview seems crazy because the building of the radical worldview inappropriately decontextualizes worldly observations from the part of the world they apply to. Yes, it's true that media organizations launch campaigns, and even hatchet jobs, against certain individuals, and these are often organized. It's also true, though, that these campaigns are limited to newsworthy public figures. The typical 'victim' of any said 'conspiracy' is really too below the radar to be directly visited by one. The most common explanation, for those who do not fit the diagnostic category of paranoia, is the victim in question either is a victim of collateral reputation-damage or is being used as a whipping boy/girl by the locals in his/her locale.
As far as any secret desire on the part of Glen Davis to focus upon conserving Ontario land that his father used to wrest a lot of wealth from, the simplest explanation for he doing so was to honour his father - not to mention to stay close to the memory of him. The more reclusive a family is, the more close-knit its members are. The upper crust have enough social skills to cover up this tight-knittedness, which makes it less obvious in families from the posh part of town.
The Republic's masthead, found at the bottom of its home page, says that it aims to cover current events without bias or doggishness. It is an alternative newspaper, and shows hints of the radical worldview that's par for the woods there. The above two articles show something about where the radical worldview comes from.
To put it bluntly, many radical notions come from (at times distorted) views from the upper crust itself. Add a few Telephone-Game-style iterations and what was offhand talk [or bragging] in the plush set becomes a plank of the radical worldview.
A lot of the radical worldview seems crazy because the building of the radical worldview inappropriately decontextualizes worldly observations from the part of the world they apply to. Yes, it's true that media organizations launch campaigns, and even hatchet jobs, against certain individuals, and these are often organized. It's also true, though, that these campaigns are limited to newsworthy public figures. The typical 'victim' of any said 'conspiracy' is really too below the radar to be directly visited by one. The most common explanation, for those who do not fit the diagnostic category of paranoia, is the victim in question either is a victim of collateral reputation-damage or is being used as a whipping boy/girl by the locals in his/her locale.
As far as any secret desire on the part of Glen Davis to focus upon conserving Ontario land that his father used to wrest a lot of wealth from, the simplest explanation for he doing so was to honour his father - not to mention to stay close to the memory of him. The more reclusive a family is, the more close-knit its members are. The upper crust have enough social skills to cover up this tight-knittedness, which makes it less obvious in families from the posh part of town.
Media Roundup: A Difficult Trip
The media reports, webbed overnight and today, covering the Conrad Black trial have a mixed focus. Some centre on the testimony of Paul Healy about the Manhattan apartment, some veer in on The Donald, others spotlight the 13 boxes and the associated testimony of the security guard who moved them out and then moved them back, and one features a law proposed by a Canadian party that is no friend of Conrad Black:
1. From Business Week, an Associated Press report that focuses on the testimony of security guard Lancelot Bloomfield, the same fellow who transferred the boxes out of 10 Toronto Street and later moved them back because of procedures not followed. The International Herald Tribune has webbed a slightly abridged version of this report.
2. A story originally webbed by Canada.com, and later webbed at the news subdomain of the National Union of Public and General Employees Website, has also made the Toronto Star's Website: "Chicago fraud trial a wakeup for Canada, MP says: NDP finance critic calls for corporate-crime law." The measure, to be proposed for drafting as a joint party bill, would create a federal securities regulatory agency (a constitutionally dicey issue in Canada for a long time,) create procedures for independent auditing of public-company books, tighten up existing ones for executive disclosure, increase the mandate for Royal Canadian Mounted Police investigation of corporate fraud, extend protection to corporate whistleblowers, and - some of you may have already guessed it - outlaw non-compete payments to individuals. The proposed joint bill would be modeled on already-existing legislation in the United States and Australia, although the last item mentioned just above seems to be a New Democratic Party original.
3. The Los Angeles Times has webbed a Reuters report that focuses upon Mr. Healy's testimony relating to the sale to Mr. Black of the Manhattan apartment.
4. Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune has writen an article that also focuses in on the testimony of Mr. Bloomfield. It notes that the boxes were removed in violation of a Canadian court order.
5. A brief Canadian Press report, webbed by the Edmonton Journal, notes that the trial itself does not resume until Tuesday, and that the prosecution is expected to rest next Wednesday.
6. Another CP report has been webbed by the Edmonton Sun. It's entitled "Trump has 'no idea' if he'll be witness for defence." A longer version of the same report, which relates Mr. Trump's quote to Mr. Healy's testimony, has been webbed by the Calgary Sun.
7. The Star has also webbed a report by Sandro Contenta, covering the testimony of Mr. Bloomfield, who said while on the stand that "he packed the boxes into Joan Maida's Honda but then had second thoughts."
"'I got ahold of myself and said, "This ain't right,"' Bloomfield told the court. 'I just brought them back in.'" Later, it also says that he testified that he had bumped into court-appointed inspector Monique Delorme "by chance."
8. Janet Whitman's report for the New York Post also discusses Mr. Healy's testimony. It begins with: "Conrad Black's pricey Park Avenue apartment swap back in 2000 might not be the shareholder scam prosecutors are alleging, a key witness at the dethroned press baron's fraud trial admitted yesterday." Near its end, it mentions that Patrick Tuite has subpoenaed Mr. Healy's Rolodex, and it notes the possibility that Mr. Healy may be called back on the stand as a defense witness.
9. A report by Theresa Tedesco and Mary Vallis, webbed by the Ottawa Citizen, discusses a ruling by Judge St. Eve disallowing the entry of documents that invoice certain purchases made by the Blacks - as well as "the paper trail of wire transfers that reveal how the money was transferred from Hollinger's Chicago head office to personal bank accounts in Toronto and London." Grounds given by the judge: Canadian documents have to be pre-certified as admissible before beeing admitted into a criminal trial, which the prosecution did not do for those documents. The report also notes: "According to American law, documents obtained in foreign jurisdictions are [prima facie] admissible only in civil proceedings and require further legal approval to be admissible for criminal purposes."
10. Mary Wisniewski's report in the Chicago Sun-Times reports on the jury getting a laugh out of hearing about the heated towel racks installed in the Manhattan apartment. Her report explains that "[t]he towel racks... came up as a way to rebut a defense claim that Black spent so much on renovations to the apartment that it justified his paying just $3 million for it in 2000." The report also contains a capsule description of the apartment itself.
11. Michael Sneed's latest column in the Sun-Times contains an excerpt from Barbara Black's latest Maclean's column.
12. Another version of that report by Ms. Tedesco and Ms. Vallis, webbed by the Vancouver Sun, has a different ending: it discloses that the (alternate) juror excused from the trial, "[a] middle-aged woman with salt-and-pepper hair who has worn a pink tracksuit to court... has been excused for personal reasons that are unrelated to the trial."
13. A report webbed by the National Post, written by Ms. Tedesco only, recounts a complaint made to the judge by Eric Sussman about Mr. Black's comments on Mr. Radler's testimony outside of court, which Judge St. Eve accepted. "'I suggest that you tell him and admonish' him, U.S. District court Judge Amy St. Eve told Lord Black's defence lawyers this week, according to court documents. 'If you can't control him ... I'd be happy to do it.'" It also notes that Csr. Sussman made it clear that the prosecution was objecting solely to Mr. Black's comments about Mr. Radler's testimony. It notes further that the prosecution has done so in part to get the objection itself on the record, and that Edward Genson has promised to get Mr. Black to refrain from any further comments. [A CBC News item discusses the same topic.]
14. The Vancouver Province has webbed a report that works both Donald Trump's comments and Mr. Bloomfield's testimony in.
15. Paul Waldie has written a profile of Joan Maida, Mr. Black's long-time personal assistant who is expected to be the first defense witness. At its end, it mentions that Ms. Maida has a rather famous son.
16. CTV News has webbed a (not-quite-new) report on Mr. Trump's continuing feud with The View, and with Rosie O'Donnell.
17. Allan Fotheringham is once again writing about the trial, as webbed again by the Welland Tribune. In this latest column, he deploys a standard gag of his to make fun of the chief defendant.
----------
Those of you who are fans of The Donald might have good reason to crow about this item: Three weeks before her contract expires, Rosie O'Donnell is gone from The View. [According to this CBC News report, she quit after getting into "an angry confrontation" with Elisabeth Hasselbeck.
To move back to the trial, Mark Steyn notes in his latest entry that the government, regarding the defraudment-of-shareholders-through-personal-items part of the case, seems to be worn down to waving a luxury that an office worker who can scare up (enough wherewithal to meet the payments on) a new $10,000 credit card could afford: a heated towel rail.
1. From Business Week, an Associated Press report that focuses on the testimony of security guard Lancelot Bloomfield, the same fellow who transferred the boxes out of 10 Toronto Street and later moved them back because of procedures not followed. The International Herald Tribune has webbed a slightly abridged version of this report.
2. A story originally webbed by Canada.com, and later webbed at the news subdomain of the National Union of Public and General Employees Website, has also made the Toronto Star's Website: "Chicago fraud trial a wakeup for Canada, MP says: NDP finance critic calls for corporate-crime law." The measure, to be proposed for drafting as a joint party bill, would create a federal securities regulatory agency (a constitutionally dicey issue in Canada for a long time,) create procedures for independent auditing of public-company books, tighten up existing ones for executive disclosure, increase the mandate for Royal Canadian Mounted Police investigation of corporate fraud, extend protection to corporate whistleblowers, and - some of you may have already guessed it - outlaw non-compete payments to individuals. The proposed joint bill would be modeled on already-existing legislation in the United States and Australia, although the last item mentioned just above seems to be a New Democratic Party original.
3. The Los Angeles Times has webbed a Reuters report that focuses upon Mr. Healy's testimony relating to the sale to Mr. Black of the Manhattan apartment.
4. Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune has writen an article that also focuses in on the testimony of Mr. Bloomfield. It notes that the boxes were removed in violation of a Canadian court order.
5. A brief Canadian Press report, webbed by the Edmonton Journal, notes that the trial itself does not resume until Tuesday, and that the prosecution is expected to rest next Wednesday.
6. Another CP report has been webbed by the Edmonton Sun. It's entitled "Trump has 'no idea' if he'll be witness for defence." A longer version of the same report, which relates Mr. Trump's quote to Mr. Healy's testimony, has been webbed by the Calgary Sun.
7. The Star has also webbed a report by Sandro Contenta, covering the testimony of Mr. Bloomfield, who said while on the stand that "he packed the boxes into Joan Maida's Honda but then had second thoughts."
"'I got ahold of myself and said, "This ain't right,"' Bloomfield told the court. 'I just brought them back in.'" Later, it also says that he testified that he had bumped into court-appointed inspector Monique Delorme "by chance."
8. Janet Whitman's report for the New York Post also discusses Mr. Healy's testimony. It begins with: "Conrad Black's pricey Park Avenue apartment swap back in 2000 might not be the shareholder scam prosecutors are alleging, a key witness at the dethroned press baron's fraud trial admitted yesterday." Near its end, it mentions that Patrick Tuite has subpoenaed Mr. Healy's Rolodex, and it notes the possibility that Mr. Healy may be called back on the stand as a defense witness.
9. A report by Theresa Tedesco and Mary Vallis, webbed by the Ottawa Citizen, discusses a ruling by Judge St. Eve disallowing the entry of documents that invoice certain purchases made by the Blacks - as well as "the paper trail of wire transfers that reveal how the money was transferred from Hollinger's Chicago head office to personal bank accounts in Toronto and London." Grounds given by the judge: Canadian documents have to be pre-certified as admissible before beeing admitted into a criminal trial, which the prosecution did not do for those documents. The report also notes: "According to American law, documents obtained in foreign jurisdictions are [prima facie] admissible only in civil proceedings and require further legal approval to be admissible for criminal purposes."
10. Mary Wisniewski's report in the Chicago Sun-Times reports on the jury getting a laugh out of hearing about the heated towel racks installed in the Manhattan apartment. Her report explains that "[t]he towel racks... came up as a way to rebut a defense claim that Black spent so much on renovations to the apartment that it justified his paying just $3 million for it in 2000." The report also contains a capsule description of the apartment itself.
11. Michael Sneed's latest column in the Sun-Times contains an excerpt from Barbara Black's latest Maclean's column.
12. Another version of that report by Ms. Tedesco and Ms. Vallis, webbed by the Vancouver Sun, has a different ending: it discloses that the (alternate) juror excused from the trial, "[a] middle-aged woman with salt-and-pepper hair who has worn a pink tracksuit to court... has been excused for personal reasons that are unrelated to the trial."
13. A report webbed by the National Post, written by Ms. Tedesco only, recounts a complaint made to the judge by Eric Sussman about Mr. Black's comments on Mr. Radler's testimony outside of court, which Judge St. Eve accepted. "'I suggest that you tell him and admonish' him, U.S. District court Judge Amy St. Eve told Lord Black's defence lawyers this week, according to court documents. 'If you can't control him ... I'd be happy to do it.'" It also notes that Csr. Sussman made it clear that the prosecution was objecting solely to Mr. Black's comments about Mr. Radler's testimony. It notes further that the prosecution has done so in part to get the objection itself on the record, and that Edward Genson has promised to get Mr. Black to refrain from any further comments. [A CBC News item discusses the same topic.]
14. The Vancouver Province has webbed a report that works both Donald Trump's comments and Mr. Bloomfield's testimony in.
15. Paul Waldie has written a profile of Joan Maida, Mr. Black's long-time personal assistant who is expected to be the first defense witness. At its end, it mentions that Ms. Maida has a rather famous son.
16. CTV News has webbed a (not-quite-new) report on Mr. Trump's continuing feud with The View, and with Rosie O'Donnell.
17. Allan Fotheringham is once again writing about the trial, as webbed again by the Welland Tribune. In this latest column, he deploys a standard gag of his to make fun of the chief defendant.
----------
Those of you who are fans of The Donald might have good reason to crow about this item: Three weeks before her contract expires, Rosie O'Donnell is gone from The View. [According to this CBC News report, she quit after getting into "an angry confrontation" with Elisabeth Hasselbeck.
To move back to the trial, Mark Steyn notes in his latest entry that the government, regarding the defraudment-of-shareholders-through-personal-items part of the case, seems to be worn down to waving a luxury that an office worker who can scare up (enough wherewithal to meet the payments on) a new $10,000 credit card could afford: a heated towel rail.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Thursday Exit
An article by Paul Waldie, webbed by the Globe and Mail, starts off with a not-quite-unprecedented surprise: another juror (a female) has been excused. He also reports on a meeting Judge St. Eve had with "lawyers privately for about 20 minutes before the trial began this morning. Prosecutor Eric Sussman declined to comment on the discussions." The article ends with the reason explaining why Patrick Tuite, counsel for Jack Boultbee, has been so lengthy in his cross-examination of Paul Healy, because Mr. Healy testified earlier that Mr. Boultbee had told him to write the appraisal memo.
The first report by Romina Maurino, webbed by 680 News, starts off with this admission by Mr. Healy: "A New York condo bought by Conrad Black from Hollinger International had received US$2 million in renovations that weren't mentioned but were factored into the price paid, a prosecution witness agreed Thursday under cross examination." Specifically, he "admitted 'it seemed logical' to factor the US$2 million that Black had spent renovating the condo into the purchase price," and that he "could have explained in the memo that the price Black paid included the US$3 million base cost plus the US$2 million spent on renovations and have clarified why the condo seemed so cheap." These admissions were elicited by Csr. Tuite.
An updated version of the same report, webbed by the Toronto Star, goes into a little more detail about this part of the cross-examination. At its end, it has a quote from Donald Trump himself: "'I haven’t been following the trial so there’s not much I can comment on,' he said while promoting his new building in Chicago" - on the site of the former Sun-Times building.
With regard to Mr. Trump's statement, the Financial Post has a more complete record of what he had to say. In addition to the above quote, he also said that "'I just came from New York, and as you know, in New York this is not a big story....I'd really have to see what was said,...' When asked if he expects to be called to testify, Mr. Trump replied, 'I have no idea.'"
The Chicago Sun-Times has more on The Donald's visit. He did stick to a topic that he has been more in touch with: bashing Rosie O'Donnell and The View.
The Reuters report not only reviews the testimony of Mr. Healy under Csr. Tuite's cross-examination, it also has a few questions from Ed Siskel under redirect. When asked by Csr. Siskel if the $3 million price as of December 2000 was too low, Mr. Healy replied: "'It's my belief that if nothing had been done to that apartment, if it had been left vacant, the company's interest in the apartment would have been worth more than $3 million,'... adding that the appreciation would have been 'significant.'" He also specified that Conrad Black benefitted from any increase in the apartment's value. "Asked whether he had any basis for valuing the apartments as he did, Healy said 'No.'"
Mr. Healy is finished up with his testimony, according to a later report by Ms. Maurino, which was webbed by 570 News. It has some information on the last witness to take the stand today: Lance Bloomfield, a security guard at Hollinger Inc's former head office at 10 Toronto St. He recounted his transferring of the 13 boxes out of the office of Mr. Black's personal assistant, Joan Maida, only to return them when an overseer of the relevant court order, court-appointed inspector Monique Delorme, told him to bring the boxes back to Ms. Maida's office. (Ms. Maida is slated to be the first defense witnesses.) It also notes that the prosecution is still deciding on the order of its last witnesses. Unsurprisingly, the report starts off with the Donald Trump appearance in Chicago.
Mr. Bloomfield's testimony is the highlight of tonight's AP summary, webbed by WQAD.com, which relates that he testified to moving 12 or 13 boxes from 10 Toronto. A longer Associated Press article, webbed by the JournalGazette Times-Courier, has more on what Mr. Bloomfield said under direct examination. He testified that he had "'misgivings'" after talking with another person - presumably, Ms. Delorme - and, after deciding that he hadn't followed the procedures he was supposed to, returned them. "When he ended his shift, he told the night security guard that 'I expected him to keep an eye on those boxes,' Bloomfield said from the stand." That night guard is expected to testify Tuesday, when court resumes sitting. (Next Monday is the Memorial Day holiday.)
----------
While continuing his watch for the Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, Mark Steyn makes an interesting point regarding the Barbara Black watch: the observers of her have a habit of relating every appearance, or non-appearance, of her at the trial to her friendships, or ex-friendships, with the respective prosecution witnesses. If this pattern of Barbara-watching is habitual, then she's one of the few who has a case of second-hand self-absorption. (In the same entry, he also calls attention to Mr. Healy's rather willing reversal from his previous testimony under direct examination.)
From the Chicago Reader's "News Bites" blog, Michael Miner has written a compendium of the Canadian reports on David Radler's testimony, with a recent column by Alan Fotheringham added to the writings of the three names that trial-watchers know well, for balance.
Also, from the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, Roger Martin points to Mr. Radler's umbrage at being called an unreformed liar, and interprets it as a sign of moral pentience.
Another blog in the Reader, "Hot Type," has this brief suggestion for the Movie of the Week circuit at the end of its May 25th entry: "As the season of 24 drew to a close with the Conrad Black trial in full swing, the two dramas started to blur together in my mind. A Black movie needs to be made simply so that Powers Boothe, aka Vice President Daniels, can play him. It's the role Boothe was born for. David Adler might be a little trickier, but Gregory Itzin, aka President Logan, could pull him off nicely."
The first report by Romina Maurino, webbed by 680 News, starts off with this admission by Mr. Healy: "A New York condo bought by Conrad Black from Hollinger International had received US$2 million in renovations that weren't mentioned but were factored into the price paid, a prosecution witness agreed Thursday under cross examination." Specifically, he "admitted 'it seemed logical' to factor the US$2 million that Black had spent renovating the condo into the purchase price," and that he "could have explained in the memo that the price Black paid included the US$3 million base cost plus the US$2 million spent on renovations and have clarified why the condo seemed so cheap." These admissions were elicited by Csr. Tuite.
An updated version of the same report, webbed by the Toronto Star, goes into a little more detail about this part of the cross-examination. At its end, it has a quote from Donald Trump himself: "'I haven’t been following the trial so there’s not much I can comment on,' he said while promoting his new building in Chicago" - on the site of the former Sun-Times building.
With regard to Mr. Trump's statement, the Financial Post has a more complete record of what he had to say. In addition to the above quote, he also said that "'I just came from New York, and as you know, in New York this is not a big story....I'd really have to see what was said,...' When asked if he expects to be called to testify, Mr. Trump replied, 'I have no idea.'"
The Chicago Sun-Times has more on The Donald's visit. He did stick to a topic that he has been more in touch with: bashing Rosie O'Donnell and The View.
The Reuters report not only reviews the testimony of Mr. Healy under Csr. Tuite's cross-examination, it also has a few questions from Ed Siskel under redirect. When asked by Csr. Siskel if the $3 million price as of December 2000 was too low, Mr. Healy replied: "'It's my belief that if nothing had been done to that apartment, if it had been left vacant, the company's interest in the apartment would have been worth more than $3 million,'... adding that the appreciation would have been 'significant.'" He also specified that Conrad Black benefitted from any increase in the apartment's value. "Asked whether he had any basis for valuing the apartments as he did, Healy said 'No.'"
Mr. Healy is finished up with his testimony, according to a later report by Ms. Maurino, which was webbed by 570 News. It has some information on the last witness to take the stand today: Lance Bloomfield, a security guard at Hollinger Inc's former head office at 10 Toronto St. He recounted his transferring of the 13 boxes out of the office of Mr. Black's personal assistant, Joan Maida, only to return them when an overseer of the relevant court order, court-appointed inspector Monique Delorme, told him to bring the boxes back to Ms. Maida's office. (Ms. Maida is slated to be the first defense witnesses.) It also notes that the prosecution is still deciding on the order of its last witnesses. Unsurprisingly, the report starts off with the Donald Trump appearance in Chicago.
Mr. Bloomfield's testimony is the highlight of tonight's AP summary, webbed by WQAD.com, which relates that he testified to moving 12 or 13 boxes from 10 Toronto. A longer Associated Press article, webbed by the JournalGazette Times-Courier, has more on what Mr. Bloomfield said under direct examination. He testified that he had "'misgivings'" after talking with another person - presumably, Ms. Delorme - and, after deciding that he hadn't followed the procedures he was supposed to, returned them. "When he ended his shift, he told the night security guard that 'I expected him to keep an eye on those boxes,' Bloomfield said from the stand." That night guard is expected to testify Tuesday, when court resumes sitting. (Next Monday is the Memorial Day holiday.)
----------
While continuing his watch for the Maclean's Conrad Black trial blog, Mark Steyn makes an interesting point regarding the Barbara Black watch: the observers of her have a habit of relating every appearance, or non-appearance, of her at the trial to her friendships, or ex-friendships, with the respective prosecution witnesses. If this pattern of Barbara-watching is habitual, then she's one of the few who has a case of second-hand self-absorption. (In the same entry, he also calls attention to Mr. Healy's rather willing reversal from his previous testimony under direct examination.)
From the Chicago Reader's "News Bites" blog, Michael Miner has written a compendium of the Canadian reports on David Radler's testimony, with a recent column by Alan Fotheringham added to the writings of the three names that trial-watchers know well, for balance.
Also, from the Toronto Life Conrad Black trial blog, Roger Martin points to Mr. Radler's umbrage at being called an unreformed liar, and interprets it as a sign of moral pentience.
Another blog in the Reader, "Hot Type," has this brief suggestion for the Movie of the Week circuit at the end of its May 25th entry: "As the season of 24 drew to a close with the Conrad Black trial in full swing, the two dramas started to blur together in my mind. A Black movie needs to be made simply so that Powers Boothe, aka Vice President Daniels, can play him. It's the role Boothe was born for. David Adler might be a little trickier, but Gregory Itzin, aka President Logan, could pull him off nicely."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)