Posted on 05/28/2007 10:19:20 PM PDT by CutePuppy
So much for Conrad Black as a suit-wearing bank robber. 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.
This, after the government promised the jury in its opening statement to prove Black was nothing more than a bank robber who wore a suit. Prosecutors charged that he and his three co-defendants "betrayed the trust of thousands of public shareholders."
Yet the jury hasn't seen a smoking gun - no explicit evidence that Black and his work pals conspired to defraud investors in his Chicago-based newspaper company, Hollinger International.
Instead, the jury has heard the testimony of David Radler - Black's turncoat deputy and a self-confessed liar - as well as audit committee members who clearly were asleep at the switch; a former minion who backtracked from his tale of Black's looting; and more than a dozen other bit players.
.....
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.
With the government unable to land a knockout blow, chances are slim that Black will feel the need to take the stand - always a risky proposition.
"If you look at the star witnesses, each one had a stake in pointing the finger at Conrad Black," said Steven Skurka, a Canadian trial lawyer who is attending the trial as a legal analyst for Canadian broadcaster CTV. "There are no victims here. It's not an Enron, so it doesn't follow the corporate greed wave."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Black is a crook, pure and simple, and all the evidence proves it, in my opinion.
What “evidence”?
I’ve been watching this whole trial from one end to the other and, frankly, I’ve rarely seen a more extreme abuse of prosecutorial power. The entire case has been an utter mess, with the prosecutors being reduced to, in essence, arguing that Black is evil because he’s rich.
Another show trial from corrupt prosecutors.
Tons and tons of evidence. I’ve been following this for years, because I was stupid enough to be a shareholder in his company. Violated securities law in every which way. No less than the Tyco or Worldcom CEO’s, who are now serving their lengthy jail sentences.
I don’t have all the info on this story in front of me. What I do know is the conservative reputation of Black and his detractors in the MSM of Canada (further left than our MSM).
Criminal charges against him were a cause of mainstream media celebration and I’m willing to stand back and not rush to judgement on this one.
I hope the truth will come out in the end regarding Mr. Black whose media holdings helped to balance the obvious bias in of the MSM in general.
It amazed me how Fitzgerald “created” a criminal case out of what I learned was essentially a non-compete clause in a contract.
Not unlike manufacturing “being involved” in someone else’s leak because one confirmed in passing to reporter[s] what they were stating on the phone call that they initiated.
The highly paid prosecution in the Black case have yet to produce any evidence of wrong-doing. They seem to be relying on suborned witnesses who insist that Black somehow hoodwinked them into signing off on (perfectly legal) non-competes.
There’s no crime here, not even sharp practice. The most the prosecution can hope for is a process crime - e.g. the appearance of perjury from memory failure. Does this remind us of anything?
See my post #7. Same prosecutor, same MO. Hopefully, result will be different and Chicago jury will not join the ranks of LA (OJ) and DC (Libby) political juries.
Are you kidding me? Read this report and tell me there was no “sharp practice”.
http://www.secinfo.com/dsvr4.1A52.c.htm
If you have such evidence, I’d strongly advise that you rush to Chicago and get in touch with Mr. Fitzgerald, since he’s going to rest his case tomorrow without having presented any of it.
This isn’t at all like Tyco or Worldcom. Those were companies destroyed by spiraling accounting scandals. This was a company destroyed by the relentless persecution of Black. As a shareholder (and, excuse me if I’m not entirely convinced of that fact - since Hollinger was far from a widely-held stock), you must be very upset that the post-Black management took the value of the stock from $20 to $4 and pretty much destroyed the company beyond any repair.
As you haven’t/won’t read the 500 pages of evidence I linked in post 11, one can only conclude you you are one of the few Blackoids left. As to your implication that I’m lying about being a shareholder and that my small loss makes me become irrational, you are a fool. Kinda reinforces my view that Gingrich and his supporters live in a happy dreamworld devoid of reality.
The “Special Committee”’s report has already been widely discarded. Indeed, that’s why the actual prosecution of Black is under far more limited grounds than that. More to the point - the report was written by people (notably Gordon Paris) who managed to sink the company in record time and then escape with millions, so I’ve no real reason to trust its findings at all.
Discarded by whom? You throw around alot of comments stated as fact, but in reality, is uninformed opinion. The sign of an intellectual bully. Believe me, cause I said so, and I’ll say it louder than you. Enjoy your coolaid.
Discarded. By. The. Prosecution. In. The. Ongoing. Case.
As. I. Already. Said.
O. K. ?
Wrong again. Blackoid all the way.
Fitzgerald would be better served spending more time at City Hall.
And btw, stocks do occasionally lose value.
Oh, and past performance is no guarantee of future results.
L
BLACK’S MONEY LAUNDERING CHARGE DROPPED
By JANET WHITMAN
May 31, 2007 — The money laundering charge against Conrad Black was dropped yesterday at the dethroned press baron’s fraud and racketeering trial, a sign prosecutors failed to present enough evidence for the jury to convict him on the count.
Judge Amy St. Eve immediately approved the prosecution’s decision to dismiss the charge, which came shortly before prosecutors rested their case after a ten weeks of oftentimes-tedious testimony.
The jury still has another 13 charges against Black to consider - counts that could put the Canadian-born media mogul turned British lord behind bars for the next two decades.
The money laundering charge, which was added to the government’s indictment in late 2005, accused Black of using $2.15 million in alleged ill-gotten gains to pay for part of a Park Avenue apartment he was buying from his Chicago newspaper company Hollinger International.
Black allegedly transferred the funds from his Canadian bank account to Hollinger International.
Prosecutors have “more than enough [other] charges to accomplish their goal if the jury buys [their] basic story that the defendants, with Black in the lead, conspired to divert . . . non-compete payments that properly belonged to Hollinger International,” said Mark Zauderer, a trial lawyer in New York specializing in white-collar crime cases.
Black is accused of looting millions from Hollinger International through payouts from phony agreements promising not to compete with the buyers of newspaper assets Hollinger was selling.
The jury heard the buyers of those assets never requested that Black and other executives be added to the so-called non-compete agreements.
Black is also charged with abusing corporate perks.
Lawyers for Black and the three other defendants are expected to wrap up their case in less than two weeks, a sign that the fallen newspaper titan won’t be taking the witness stand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.