Conrad Black Found Guilty of Fraud and Obstruction of Justice

Following four months of testimony and two weeks of deliberations, a jury in Chicago found Conrad Black, newspaper tycoon and Member of the British House of Lords, guilty of mail fraud and obstruction of justice. He faces decades in jail. This is what happens, though, to businessmen who treat the shareholders’ funds as their own personal piggy bank. Naturally, he will appeal, but unlike Scooter Libby, no commutation is going to save him if it should fail.

The initial charge was that he and others had defrauded shareholders of Hollinger International Inc. of $60-$80 million. As Hollinger sold off various newspapers that it owned, Lord Black and his fellow felons agreed to non-compete deals in exchange for cash. Prosecutors maintained that the funds should have gone to the shareholders and that the non-compete deals were pointless and possibly unenforceable. In fairness, one must note that Black was acquitted of racketeering, tax charges and five wire and mail fraud counts.

At its peak, Hollinger was the third biggest publisher of English language newspapers after News Corp. and Gannett. Its titles included Canada's National Post, the Jerusalem Post, the Sun-Times in Chicago, and Britain’s the Daily Telegraph. Hollinger also owned and operated hundreds of community newspapers. Known now as Sun-Times Media Group Inc., it is still a force in the news biz, but not quite what it was. In large part, this is thanks to Lord Black.

US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, the man who also got Scooter Libby but not Dick Cheney, was the government’s man on the Lord Black trial. He said, “The verdict vindicates the serious public interest in making sure that when insiders in a corporation deal with money entrusted to them by the shareholders, that they not engage in self-dealing, that they not break the law to benefit themselves instead of the shareholders.” This journal couldn’t agree more.

His lawyers are already spinning the verdict, though. “Conrad Black was acquitted of all the central charges,” according to his lawyer Edward Greenspan. Not really. The obstruction of justice charge was upheld because of videotape showing him removing boxes from his offices in Toronto. As with Mr. Libby, the obstruction activities prevent any real determination of whether the other charges are valid. Tampering with evidence is, for that reason, a big deal. Lord Black was acquitted of some charges not because he was innocent, but because there was not proof of guilt – a much different thing.

© Copyright 2007 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.

Home