Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Stephen





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 645
Reputation: 72.9
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:48 pm    Post subject: Conrad Black guilty Reply with quote

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/Arti.....TopStories

Quote:
A U.S. jury found Conrad Black guilty of three counts of criminal fraud and the serious charge of obstruction of justice -- but cleared the former medial tycoon of racketeering, wire fraud and tax evasion on Friday.

The convictions mean Black faces a maximum sentence of 35 years, if served consecutively, and US$1 million in fines.

As expected, Black's attorneys announced they will appeal the guilty verdicts.

Black, the former chief executive of newspaper empire Hollinger Inc., sat expressionless, his gaze turned downward as the jury delivered its verdict after 12 days of deliberation. But as the obstruction verdict was read, Black looked up, his brow furrowed and an intense scowl on his face.
Stephen





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 645
Reputation: 72.9
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

so... yeah... how about that...?
PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is not fair!
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seems there is quite an appetite in the US lately for taking down famous people. Martha Stewart went to prison for lying about something nobody was ever charged for. They tried to do the same to Libby, except he got a pardon. It seems that right at the moment, it just does not pay to try to be rich or famous, or some public prosecutor with gubernatorial or presidential visions will come after you. Don't know if he will be able to escape this, don't know if he deserves it.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've never been a big supporter of Black... always thought he was kind of sleezy. That being said, I think only being found guilty of a few crimes is the way it should have turned out.

Wonder how the sentencing will go... I'd prefer a shorter jail sentence, with heavy financial punishment.
Riley W





Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 857
Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5Reputation: 35.5
votes: 10
Location: Manitoba

PostPosted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He is appealing... :shock:
Stephen





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 645
Reputation: 72.9
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Andrew Coyne has an interesting column on the verdict today:

http://www.canada.com/national.....405441360b
cerl7011





Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 334
Reputation: 26.6Reputation: 26.6Reputation: 26.6

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good ridens to bad Black...

If someone wants to give up his Canadian citizenship and run on over to the Queen's England, fine...but don't expect any sympathy from a True Blue Patriot!...

erl
Stephen





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 645
Reputation: 72.9
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cerl7011 wrote:
Good ridens to bad Black...

If someone wants to give up his Canadian citizenship and run on over to the Queen's England, fine...but don't expect any sympathy from a True Blue Patriot!...

erl


Chretien made him give up the citizenship because there was bad blood between them.

I don't think that Canadians can be knighted by the Queen anymore either because of Chretien's personal fued with Black.
Ruth





Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 243
Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5
votes: 7

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I read an interesting article by Beryl Wajsman that suggested the conviction and sentence he received was entirely politically motivated.
An excerpt:
Quote:
"If you're going to take liberties and break the law with other people's money, there are going to be consequences." That, U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald told reporters yesterday, was the message of the verdict in the Conrad Black trial. Those twenty words of Fitzgerald's are a lie. His words stand as yet another manifestation of the mania and manipulation with which the prosecution prejudiced the judicial wells in this persecution.
We got an earlier taste of it when the jury came back hung - a clear statement that the government had not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt - yet Judge Amy St. Eve instructed it to go back into deliberations and "...not be afraid to change your opinions while staying true to your firmly held principles..." That was an oxymoronic instruction and one that sent a blatantly biased signal. Find the defendants guilty of something!
Amidst the cacophony of smug, sanctimonious condemnation of Black in the media that followed in such ungracious haste the announcement of the jury's decision, one matter was overlooked. He wasn't found guilty of any actual crimes...
What "laws" was Conrad Black convicted of breaking? None! At least none that related to the central matters in the Hollinger dispute and the central charges in the government's case...
Conrad Black was indicted on some 13 counts of fraud, racketeering, tax evasion and obstruction of justice. He was acquitted on nine...
Innocent of criminal fraud. Innocent of tax evasion. Innocent of racketeering. Indeed the amount Black is now liable for forfeiture is some $2 million which relate to two mail fraud convictions on two of the small non-competes on which there was no main fraud conviction. A far cry from the $90 million the prosecution had set up at the beginning of the trial. And some one-tenth of the cost of this case to the taxpaying public...
What he was found guilty of - after the judge's instruction to the jury to resume deliberations - were three counts of mail fraud and one count of obstruction of justice...
The obstruction of justice charge related to Black's removal of boxes of documents from his Toronto office that we all saw on that security camera film. Three ironies in this charge. The first is that by the prosecution's own admission it had all the documents in those boxes so how was justice obstructed? The second is that this event occurred in Toronto which is hardly in the jurisdiction of Cook County, Illinois, so how did it form part
of an American bill of indictment? The third is that Conrad Black knew the locations of cameras in his own offices yet the tapes showed that he was not concerned nor did he try to dismantle them...
The three counts of mail fraud that Black was found guilty of related to the expedition by mail of contracts and cheques related to non-compete payments that the prosecution had alleged were fraudulently obtained. They alleged it but there was no conviction on a main charge of fraud. In other words, Black was not convicted of any main fraud count on the very charges he was found guilty of in the mail fraud! How could it be illegal to use the U.S. Postal Service to send contracts and cheques resulting from legal transactions?
hamiltonguyo





Joined: 27 Jan 2007
Posts: 250
Reputation: 49.5Reputation: 49.5Reputation: 49.5Reputation: 49.5Reputation: 49.5

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The whole thing was a witch hunt. They charged him in a district with 95% conviction rate, threw as many charges at him as possible hoping one would stick, and cut a ridiculous plea bargain with David Radler, which essentially bribed him into telling lies about Black (not that he wasn't already a self admitted liar).

All their case relied on Radler, its amazing the jury believed him.

Also to be said about the obstruction of justice charge. Black moved the tapes BEFORE he got the court order and promptly put them back when he got it. There is no proof he took anything from the boxes and in fact the government had copies of the tapes.

The jury was hardly his peers either. If it was a true jury of his peers he would have been tried by other CEOs or by the House of Lords. He was tried by people that had immense reason to want to take him down because he was much richer than them.

It is also apt to point out that Black was a dual Canadian and British citizen living mostly in Britain at the time of his appointment to the Lords. Two other dual-citizens received titular honours during that time yet Chretien never gave them an ultimatum. If it wasn't for the courts unwillingness to rule on the use of royal prerogative by the Prime Minister, Chretien wouldn't have been allowed to do what he did. He was clearly exercising a vendetta agaisnt Black because he criticized him.
cbasu





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 391
Reputation: 131.3
votes: 2

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Andrew Cohen's column in the Citizen sums it up rather well.

In the end, Mr. Black was done in by his own "avarice and hubris".

There is really nothing more to be said about this convicted criminal.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For so long the corporate crowd got away with crap like this. For that reason it is somewhat unfair for these old guard folks to take the fall for the new rules. But I do believe it has to be done. We need white collar justice and these people are going to have to get used to that fast or go to jail.
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
For so long the corporate crowd got away with crap like this. For that reason it is somewhat unfair for these old guard folks to take the fall for the new rules. But I do believe it has to be done. We need white collar justice and these people are going to have to get used to that fast or go to jail.


Before the Feds charged him with anything Hollinger was making lots of money. Since he was charged the company doesn't even exist any longer.

They should charge the prosecuters with some kind of negligence in destroying that company.

All he did was wet his beak a little while making his company millions. For that you should go to jail?
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:
Quote:
For so long the corporate crowd got away with crap like this. For that reason it is somewhat unfair for these old guard folks to take the fall for the new rules. But I do believe it has to be done. We need white collar justice and these people are going to have to get used to that fast or go to jail.


Before the Feds charged him with anything Hollinger was making lots of money. Since he was charged the company doesn't even exist any longer.

They should charge the prosecuters with some kind of negligence in destroying that company.

All he did was wet his beak a little while making his company millions. For that you should go to jail?


That's just it. It wasn't his company. The minute you take your company public it ceases to be yours. He acted like it was still his.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Conrad Black guilty

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB