Justice, You Say?
No doubt about it, the Conrad Black et al trial just wrapped up with a conviction on four of the fourteen counts against Lord Black was a peculiar event resonating 'gotcha!' more than justice. It did seem a bit of a set-up for a double purpose; to point out yet again to the American public that corporate leaders are not above the law and that the safety of their investments are taken seriously - and to curry the career of an ambitious U.S. Attorney and his young, career-aggressive hot-shot team.
The rather self-aggrandizing pronouncements as the trial commenced labelling the machinations of Conrad Black and his associates as "corporate kleptocrats" busy looting hundreds of millions of dollars from Hollinger, money that was owing to the company's shareholders, and backed up by no fewer than 14 charges ranging from mail fraud to obstruction of justice, to malicious racketeering, set the stage for a confounding display of something that began to look suspiciously like setting an example and anyone would do.
The witnesses brought forward by the prosecution, including Conrad Black's former colleague, David Radler, had, it would certainly appear, been bullied into fearing for their personal well-being, and from there into accepting their roles, however reluctantly, as witnesses for the prosecution. Threatened with severe penalties that could be alleviated by co-operation, who might not succumb in their own self-preservation?
Well, Hollinger lawyer Mark Kipnis, for one, someone who never received any of the fraudulently-obtained non-compete payments, and whom even the judge felt might have been unfairly implicated through a lack of evidence, and who yet refused to give false testimony under duress. For his ethical fortitude and display of moral character he now faces the potential of 15 years in jail for his perceived part in the fiasco. Odd justice.
Odd too that the U.S. State Attorneys would lay charges against Conrad Black for Obstruction of Justice when the 'obstruction' attempt took place in Canada, when Lord Black defied an Ontario injunction against the removal of any potentially incriminating evidence. Which doesn't excuse by any means the late-night surreptitious attempt to spirit boxes of 'personal papers' out of Lord Black's vacated office.
Odd in the extreme, and not even remotely smacking of justice that personages of the elevated position of former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and Illinois governor Jim Thompson were not held responsible for the very non-compete payments held to be illegal, but which were approved by both of them. Mr. Thompson, after all, had been the chairman of Hollinger's audit committee.
One supposes that to bring charges against either of these two high-powered men would not have succeeded in adding lustre to the career-padding intentions of the prosecutors. Their ongoing attempts to get the jury members onside in their prosecutorial determination to hang guilt on the quartet had them playing on the lavish lifestyles of Lord and Lady Black in an obvious attempt to manipulate the jurors' opinions in the wake of previous prosecutions like that of Enron Corporation.
Resentment of wealthy corporate America that saw nothing wrong in defying ethics to further feather their already lavish lifestyles didn't work in this instance. Of the 140 prospective jurors interviewed most were found to have 'lost every dime' in the WorldCom collapse, with pensions evaporated on the stock market. The jury selection process winnowed out those with a grudge and the jury did their duty outstandingly well.
Compared to the previous scandals of Enron and WorldCom and others, the Hollinger affair with its non-compete payments, illegally depriving wealthy stock holders of additional profit, unlike the countless middle-class Americans who lost everything targeted small fry in relative terms. But the courtroom drama played out in the Black trial was all about white-collar crime at the very highest levels in the U.S.
And Black and associates just got caught up in the general fray, as a a result of their greed. Do the deed, pay the piper. Truly - so sad, too bad.
The rather self-aggrandizing pronouncements as the trial commenced labelling the machinations of Conrad Black and his associates as "corporate kleptocrats" busy looting hundreds of millions of dollars from Hollinger, money that was owing to the company's shareholders, and backed up by no fewer than 14 charges ranging from mail fraud to obstruction of justice, to malicious racketeering, set the stage for a confounding display of something that began to look suspiciously like setting an example and anyone would do.
The witnesses brought forward by the prosecution, including Conrad Black's former colleague, David Radler, had, it would certainly appear, been bullied into fearing for their personal well-being, and from there into accepting their roles, however reluctantly, as witnesses for the prosecution. Threatened with severe penalties that could be alleviated by co-operation, who might not succumb in their own self-preservation?
Well, Hollinger lawyer Mark Kipnis, for one, someone who never received any of the fraudulently-obtained non-compete payments, and whom even the judge felt might have been unfairly implicated through a lack of evidence, and who yet refused to give false testimony under duress. For his ethical fortitude and display of moral character he now faces the potential of 15 years in jail for his perceived part in the fiasco. Odd justice.
Odd too that the U.S. State Attorneys would lay charges against Conrad Black for Obstruction of Justice when the 'obstruction' attempt took place in Canada, when Lord Black defied an Ontario injunction against the removal of any potentially incriminating evidence. Which doesn't excuse by any means the late-night surreptitious attempt to spirit boxes of 'personal papers' out of Lord Black's vacated office.
Odd in the extreme, and not even remotely smacking of justice that personages of the elevated position of former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and Illinois governor Jim Thompson were not held responsible for the very non-compete payments held to be illegal, but which were approved by both of them. Mr. Thompson, after all, had been the chairman of Hollinger's audit committee.
One supposes that to bring charges against either of these two high-powered men would not have succeeded in adding lustre to the career-padding intentions of the prosecutors. Their ongoing attempts to get the jury members onside in their prosecutorial determination to hang guilt on the quartet had them playing on the lavish lifestyles of Lord and Lady Black in an obvious attempt to manipulate the jurors' opinions in the wake of previous prosecutions like that of Enron Corporation.
Resentment of wealthy corporate America that saw nothing wrong in defying ethics to further feather their already lavish lifestyles didn't work in this instance. Of the 140 prospective jurors interviewed most were found to have 'lost every dime' in the WorldCom collapse, with pensions evaporated on the stock market. The jury selection process winnowed out those with a grudge and the jury did their duty outstandingly well.
Compared to the previous scandals of Enron and WorldCom and others, the Hollinger affair with its non-compete payments, illegally depriving wealthy stock holders of additional profit, unlike the countless middle-class Americans who lost everything targeted small fry in relative terms. But the courtroom drama played out in the Black trial was all about white-collar crime at the very highest levels in the U.S.
And Black and associates just got caught up in the general fray, as a a result of their greed. Do the deed, pay the piper. Truly - so sad, too bad.
Labels: Justice, Life's Like That
posted by Pieface | 6:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home