stardust
Anyone Care to Help Lord Black?
Posted on: 07/20/2010 11:30
Shall I take up a collection? He seems to be homeless. I'll have to google and see what assets or properties the lovely Barbara owns. I like Lord Black! I'm the only one who does and I don't know why I like him. I'm so happy for him altho' he's not out of the woods yet. I think he's a good person. When you have/had his kind of power its so easy to go wrong. I think he was set-up or fingered by his enemies. Other companies have been doing the same as he did with no penalties as far as I can understand.
Send your donation in! For $20. I'll send you a Lord Black 2010 lapel pin.....kidding 
I hope and pray that Canada will let him come back here. He has a big mansion not very far from where I live.
Published On Mon Jul 19 2010
After serving more than 28 months in a Florida prison for his 6 ½-year sentence, Inmate No. 18330-424 will soon be seeing the light of day.
But it won’t be as he remembered. After all, this isn’t your average prisoner. It’s Conrad Black, the former media baron and man about town who once owned property in three different countries, with a company jet for ease of transportation.
On Monday, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago granted Black bail, though his lawyer says he has not yet been released and the conditions of bail are yet to be determined by a judge.
“We are extremely pleased the Court of Appeals rejected the government’s argument that our unanimous Supreme Court victory meant nothing,” Miguel Estrada, Black’s lawyer, said in a statement. “According to the Court of Appeals, the trial judge must now set the bail terms. I am trying to get on the judge’s calendar so we can finalize the details and get Lord Black out as soon as possible.”
But where will Lord Black go?
Gone is his Palm Beach mansion in Florida.
Richard Siklos, author of Shades of Black, wondered whether Black may be able to stay in the Palm Beach retreat through a deal with the investment firm that now owns the property.
“He definitely seems to have lost ownership,” he said. “I’m guessing he wouldn’t want to be in Florida having been confined there. I can’t entirely imagine why he’d go back to New York either.”
His Park Avenue pad, an apartment that was the site of soirees with New York’s elite, sold in June 2005 for $10.5 million U.S., with most of the proceeds forfeited to U.S. authorities.
His four-storey London mansion is also gone, sold for $13.1 million pounds ($25 million U.S.) in 2005.
Siklos said Black probably wants to return to the only home that remains in his once large stable of property: the heavily mortgaged Bridle Path mansion he inherited from his family in the 70s, right here in Toronto.
Siklos acknowledged it would be unusual if authorities allowed Black to leave the U.S. Another complication is the fact that Black gave up his Canadian citizenship in order to become a member of the British House of Lords.
Richard Powers, associate dean of the Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, said Black has been a model prisoner, so the conditions of his bail will likely be fairly lenient. He probably won’t be considered a flight risk but will likely be monitored and asked to surrender his passport, said Powers.
“It is not like he is getting off scot-free,” he said.
Terms of Black’s bail will be set by Chicago Judge Amy St. Eve, who presided over the criminal trial. That will happen as soon as Black and his lawyer can make a court appearance.
The decision comes after a legal victory for Black in June, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to set aside Black’s three mail fraud convictions.
The Supreme Court ruled that a law used to help convict Black on three counts of mail fraud was too broad. The justices in the case unanimously agreed to narrow the definition of “honest services” fraud, which was previously applied to a person within a company or official office who misused their position to benefit from a bribe, kickback or undisclosed conflict of interest. The narrowed or clarified definition includes only bribes and kickbacks.
The ruling didn’t exonerate Black, but allowed him to continue to argue against his convictions in a lower court.
Black’s lawyers subsequently filed for bail in Chicago on July 6.
Powers said if the three fraud charges are thrown out, he expects Black’s lawyers will argue the time Black has spent in prison should be considered time served toward the remaining obstruction charge. Powers said he didn’t think it was beyond the realm of possibility that the court could decide Black had served his time.
“Where his actions would fall on the scale of minor obstruction to a more serious obstruction is open to debate. It may actually be time served in which case he may be out sooner that we think,” said Powers. “He could be home for (America) Thanksgiving or Christmas.”
Eric Sussman, former lead prosecutor in the Black trial, said he was surprised by Monday’s decision.
“But quite frankly, I’ve been surprised quite frequently in this case,” Sussman said in an email.
At the time of the U.S. Supreme Court decision last month, Sussman called the prospect of bail “extremely unlikely.”
Ronald Safer, managing partner at Schiff Hardin LLP in Chicago, said the decision is not unprecedented but is certainly not common.
“The seventh circuit now has to decide whether the error that was made was harmless,” said Safer, who represented Hollinger’s in-house lawyer Mark Kipnis, who was convicted alongside Black. “As tea leaves go these are very positive tea leaves.”
Safer said he expects the decision will have an impact on Black’s overall sentence, the majority of which he is serving for obstruction of justice.
He said Black could be transported to Chicago to appear in court sometime within the next two weeks.
But if Black’s looking to rent an apartment there, he might need to borrow some cash.
“I don’t know what his personal financial situation is, but if he lost his Florida home, you can infer he has liquidity issues,” Siklos said.
Black is also being sued for $71 million (U.S.) in back taxes by the Internal Revenue Service, which alleges he failed to report $120 million in U.S. income during the period 1998 to 2003.
Black, 65, was convicted in 2007 of illegally siphoning $6 million out of the Hollinger International newspaper empire under the pretense it was a so-called noncompete payment from buyers of the company’s assets. He was also convicted of obstructing justice by spiriting boxes of documents out of his Toronto offices to keep them out of the hands of investigators.
Prior to the fraud investigations, Black controlled Hollinger International and owned a number of major newspapers including the Daily Telegraph in the U.K., the Chicago Sun-Times, the Jerusalem Post and the National Post.
As for the future, author and journalist Peter C. Newman said “having commented freely on Conrad Black’s conviction, we must now treat his successful bid for freedom with equal respect.”
“I believe he leaves his American jail as a better man, with a higher appreciation for Canada.”
Black has been serving his 6 ½-year sentence at Coleman federal prison in Florida since March 2008.
- Login or register to post comments
- Add new comment
Comments
Mendalla
I don't totally get why he
Posted on: 07/20/2010 11:33
I don't totally get why he deserves bail in the first place. Only the fraud charges are up for review. He's still guilty of obstructing justice.
Mendalla
redbaron338
Do I get a tax receipt for
Posted on: 07/20/2010 11:36
Do I get a tax receipt for charitable donation?
Rev. Steven Davis
I'm not a lawyer so I
Posted on: 07/20/2010 11:45
I'm not a lawyer so I probably just don't understand the fine points of the law, but the obstruction of justice charge as I understood it had to do with Black violating a U.S. court order by removing documents from his office in Toronto. I've always wondered how it is that a U.S. court order had any jurisdiction or validity in Toronto? Wouldn't that be an attempt to apply U.S. law extra-territorially? If someone can explain that, I'd appreciate it.
I need to know, because it's possible that someday I may well be a multi-billionaire who runs afoul of U.S. law and just to cover the possibility I need to know what I can and can't do!
stardust
Rev. Davis quote: I've always
Posted on: 07/20/2010 12:17
Rev. Davis
quote: I've always wondered how it is that a U.S. court order had any jurisdiction or validity in Toronto? Wouldn't that be an attempt to apply U.S. law extra-territorially? If someone can explain that, I'd appreciate it.
Me too......its awhile ago now but there was a summit in Quebec about Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. There was publicity about U.S. police being on Can. soil with the power to arrest people....?. I didn't understand it.
stardust
Comments from the Star :
Posted on: 07/20/2010 12:20
Comments from the Star :
Yes, Conrad was a trifle delusional, but criminal?
Time will tell.
The Hollinger suits are only making lawyers rich. It has been proved that he broke no law relating to Hollinger. It also looks like he may be divesting himself of all of his US holdings so he can tell the IRS to pound salt too.
I think Black will walk and then start to make everyone he can pay for daring to stand up to him. I would not be surprised to find out that Mr. Black holds a grudge.
-Believing that you're better than others
-Fantasizing about power, success and attractiveness
-Exaggerating your achievements or talents
-Expecting constant praise and admiration
-Believing that you're special and acting accordingly
-Failing to recognize other people's emotions and feelings
-Expecting others to go along with your ideas and plans
-Taking advantage of others
-Expressing disdain for those you feel are inferior
-Believing that others are jealous of you
-Appearing as tough-minded or unemotional
Meet me at Hortons and I'll buy a coffee.
Did he steal tens of millions of dollors from Hollinger? About that question I, like the Buddha, when asked the meaning of life... retain a noble silence; and 'smile'. Was he justified (in his own mind) to earn a King's Ransom for his talents at running Hollinger... in an age when sports stars earn hundreds of millions of dollars, in the context of that 'moral universe'... yes. Most certainly. Conrad Black's achievements in spearheading an international publishing empire are very impressive... and, as for me, he deserves $100 million... far more than do hockey, golf, basketball, or rock stars. The quality of his writing--both journalistic features, and books--is very impressive. The guy is brilliant, love him or hate him... you can't take that away from him. And he's an iconic character... brilliant, arrogant, a sphinx. My company (concordworldwideonline.com) is launching an e-zine, (coffeehouseplato)... and we would be honoured to have Conrad contribute his writings, intelligence, erudition... to our publication. About, whether his elite friends will accept him back into the Bay Street club... who cares. Conrad's ego is the size of mountain... that will carry him through, whatever the reception.
His legal defense, of the order of $100 million... is obscene. If it was you, me... we'd be cooling our heals behind bars for decades. Is this an indictment of the US legal system... I can only say that America is a capitalist society.
I've enjoyed his published articles, while in prison... and knowing just how much work is involved in writing these... obviously, he wasn't washing prison floors at 15 cents an hour (as was reputed). Nor was he bunking next to 'switch blade Charlie'... as he was threated in the court trial.
They got him on a constructed technicality and it sorely needed to be done because of his blatant disregard for the rights of shareholders.
So he gets out now and will likely go free. No problem, his reputation is sullied, his high society pals have all deserted him and he will never be accepted in those circles again; that is the unkindest cut of all for him -he lived and breathed and longed to be in high society.
Doesn't matter what happens now, whom he sues, or what decisions get reversed. He will always wear Jailbird eau de cologne. And that is how justice has been served on former Lord Black of Cross Harbour.
Conrad Black should consider replacing federal liberal lacklustre leader Micheal Ignatieff. At least, liberals would have once again a leader!
He has proven you can lock him up but you can't get him down. The measure of a man isn't in what he does when in power but what he does when he has no power. Mr. Black proved he is a man to be contended with.
He could have fled and lived in kingly comfort anywhere else. I'll be interested in what happens next to him.
I imagine the IRS will make Black's life a living hell for many years...that should satisfy quite a few of his detractors here.
America is turning into a cesspool of greed and privilige.
My Canada includes Lord Black.
Mendalla
Rev. Steven Davis wrote: I'm
Posted on: 07/20/2010 12:24
I'm not a lawyer so I probably just don't understand the fine points of the law, but the obstruction of justice charge as I understood it had to do with Black violating a U.S. court order by removing documents from his office in Toronto. I've always wondered how it is that a U.S. court order had any jurisdiction or validity in Toronto? Wouldn't that be an attempt to apply U.S. law extra-territorially? If someone can explain that, I'd appreciate it.
I need to know, because it's possible that someday I may well be a multi-billionaire who runs afoul of U.S. law and just to cover the possibility I need to know what I can and can't do!
I believe that our courts can accept US orders and allow them to be enforced here, but I'm not a lawyer either. Also, I believe that his company was incorporated in the US so US law applied to them even if they had offices outside the US.
Mendalla
stardust
Mendalla What you say could
Posted on: 07/20/2010 12:38
Mendalla
What you say could be correct. I don't recall what this is about ....violated Can. court order?
The other thing I'd like to say is I do wish to express very profound regret and sadness at the severe hardship inflicted upon all of the shareholders, including a great many employees, by the evaporation of $1.85 billion of shareholder value under my successors. The stock price was between $80 and $22 -- $18, I should say, and $22 -- for over a year after I retired; and, what has happened subsequently, much of it was because of the pursuit of activities that, as I was still a director, I warned my colleagues against.
Your Honour's not judging business performance, but I would not wish to leave that fact unmentioned.
I also want to express deep regret for the medical problems that these proceedings have caused in the families of the defendants, including my own.
Beyond that, I think it only remains for me to thank your Honour for the unfailing courtesy and efficiency with which you conducted this trial. Prior to arriving under your jurisdiction, I was the subject of an almost universal presumption of guilt, including the theory that I violated a Canadian court order -- which I did not do and have not been accused of doing -- an almost unbroken presumption of guilt on all counts and in almost all courts, both of law and of public opinion.
Thank you, your Honour.
joejack2
No one can have it both ways.
Posted on: 07/20/2010 13:13
No one can have it both ways. He turned his back on Canada to become a British Lord, and now he's playing the "I Am Canadian" card ? (sounds like a Molson's commercial). Canada's response should be 'Conrad who??????"
lastpointe
I think he is a pompous ass
Posted on: 07/20/2010 13:45
I think he is a pompous ass who skirts that law and feels above the law.
However I am glad they overturned the ruling that he was charged under. It seemed pretty scetchy at the time.
Get him on something legit or not at all. You can't just jail someone for being a pompous ass.
It never seemed like a criminal offense even while the prosecutor was trying it.
Rev. Steven Davis
I confess to some sympathy
Posted on: 07/20/2010 13:52
I confess to some sympathy for Black, as well. Truth be told, he didn't really "turn his back" on Canada. He was a dual British-Canadian citizen. Tony Blair offered him a peerage (a seat in the House of Lords.) Jean Chretien dusted off the Nickle Resolution (passed in 1905 or something) that said Canadians couldn't accept peerages. The problem was that the Nickle Resolution isn't a law. It's simply a resolution of the House of Commons - it expresses the opinion of the House of Commons, but it was never made a bill and never presented to the Senate for their approval. (Actually, it's been a few years since this all happened so my memory is a bit rusty - I don't even remember if the Nickle Resolution is a resolution of the House of Commons or of a House of Commons Committee.) So, legally, nothing prevented Black from becoming a Lord while still being a Canadian citizen. And, since he was a British citizen, had I been Tony Blair I'd have simply told Jean Chretien to stuff it. Peerages in the House of Lords are for British citizens and granted by the British government. Instead Blair gave in to Chretien, denied the Lordship because Black was also a Canadian and Chretien interfered and left Black with little choice but to renounce his Canadian citizenship in order to receive the peerage. So, really - not only has he been screwed by the U.S. Justice system (which I believe he was) he was also screwed by the Chretien government basically because he and Chretien didn't like each other. Just my take on things, of course.
stardust
Correction: my quote to Rev.
Posted on: 07/20/2010 14:04
Correction: my quote to Rev. Davis is in error.
"Me too......its awhile ago now but there was a summit in Quebec about Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. There was publicity about U.S. police being on Can. soil with the power to arrest people....?. I didn't understand it."
I googled. This was in connection with the Montebello summit in Quebec 2007 I think. They were discussing the implications of a future Mexico,Canada, and U.S. partnership. North Am. Union, SPP, Canada border security etc. It has nothing to do with Conrad Black.
This is what I was thinking about - off topic
LBmuskoka
lastpointe wrote: Get him on
Posted on: 07/21/2010 06:52
Get him on something legit or not at all. You can't just jail someone for being a pompous ass.
One of the great downfalls of a democratic legal system, IMHO
Many countries have treaties that allow for evidence collection by other countries. Even the once locked vaults of Swiss banks are no longer free from investigating eyes - the key was provided by victims of the Holocaust seeking treasurers hidden by Nazi thieves.
Personally I have no problem with this; justice should know no borders.
That Black broke laws is also no doubt in my mind - I hold that all people reaching that level of power will break some law either on their way up, to hold on, or on the way down. Indeed, I am more likely to believe him guilty than some woman charged with welfare fraud but then that may be my personal bias - I tend to be more lenient with those trying to keep a roof over their heads than to those who like to throw extravagant birthday parties on Mediterranean islands; my bad and probably makes me guilty of being a pompous ass.
That Black has received bail is no more an indication of his guilt or innocence than his conviction. It is a point of law and whether the prosecutors applied the point of law correctly. In Black's case the point of law is "honest services fraud" and is a result of a US Supreme Court review of that law and its decision made in June 2010.
Black is not the only case that is being reviewed under this recent decision, Jeffrey Skilling the face of the Enron debacle and apparently the reason behind the recent SC review, will also be retried; although poor Jeffrey appears to be having a harder time of getting bail, maybe he didn't acquire enough wealth for adequate representation.
For a review of the SC and Honest Services fraud here's a link United States: U.S. Supreme Court Curtails Federal "Honest Services" Fraud Statute
LB
Justice and power must be brought together, so that whatever is just may be powerful, and whatever is powerful may be just.
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
Rev. Steven Davis
LBmuskoka wrote: That Black
Posted on: 07/21/2010 09:20
That Black broke laws is also no doubt in my mind - I hold that all people reaching that level of power will break some law either on their way up, to hold on, or on the way down.
LB
Justice and power must be brought together, so that whatever is just may be powerful, and whatever is powerful may be just.
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
I wouldn't disagree with you, LB. The reason I think he was "screwed" by the U.S. justice system is because I think that system has treated him unfairly in comparison to others who I would suggest have done far worse. I see no logical reason for Conrad Black to be made an example of.
joejack2
The whole case reminds me of
Posted on: 07/21/2010 09:49
The whole case reminds me of the old Beatle's song, "Money can't buy me love". There are obviously other things it can't buy. Lord Black, according to Wikipedia, was kicked out of Upper Canada College for selling exam papers, Trinity College School for insubordination, etc. He flunked out of Osgoode Hall but later got his law degree from Universite Laval and a MA from McGill. In spite of some of these checkered incidents, he's tenacious. And, he did become a Roman Catholic, so there's some redeeming feature here. Maybe he could imitate Bonhoeffer and do his version of 'Letters and Papers from Prison". (No disrespect intended toward Dr. Bonhoeffer).
graeme
I knew Conrad when he was
Posted on: 07/21/2010 14:23
I knew Conrad when he was still in his twenties. He will always rank as the most arrogant egoist I have ever met. In a book about him and his type, the author mentioned there was great controversy over the colour of his eyes. The author tookk that as a sign of his mystical powers.
In fact, many people don't know the colour of his eyes because he has a habit of closing them during a ciscussion. A news item said he does that to concentrate. That's wrong, too. He closes them because in a discussion, the other person doesn't exist. Conrad only hears himself. He is he complete egoist. This is the man who used to pay people like Kissinger 50,000 a day to discuss foreign affairs with him.
Waiting for him will be the faithful Lady Barbara. In fact, she is perhaps the only person in the world as self-centred, materialistic and bigoted as he is. She has married three times,always to people much like her. And each time she married a step up the economic ladder. She may not be pleased at them spending the rest of their lives in court dealing with private lawsuits, especially after the US government presetns its tax bill. For Barbara, anything less than four mansions is poverty level.
Motheroffive
I don't know anything about
Posted on: 07/22/2010 02:34
I don't know anything about Conrad Black, directly; But indirectly, I know that he has made a lot of people suffer in the way that he conducts business...his actions have contributed to the concentration of media in Canada, they have led to lay-offs and poor treatment of employees, especially unionized ones. His business model, aside from any discussion of legal or not, is immoral, in my view since demonstrates very little regard for people.
Also, regardless of what led to him rescinding his Canadian citizenship, he did so with his eyes wide open. There are all sorts of restrictions around him re-entering Canada now, given his criminal record and lack of standing.
With regard to Conrad Black being penalized unfairly by the US justice system, he's not alone in that. Marc Emery was extradited to the US for something that isn't a crime in Canada but the US wanted him and they've got him now. As our government is fond of warning people, if you get in trouble when dealing with a foreign government, their hands are tied (or they claim they are).
LBmuskoka
Rev. Steven Davis wrote: I
Posted on: 07/22/2010 06:17
I wouldn't disagree with you, LB. The reason I think he was "screwed" by the U.S. justice system is because I think that system has treated him unfairly in comparison to others who I would suggest have done far worse. I see no logical reason for Conrad Black to be made an example of.
Black is not the only person charged or convicted under the Honest Services act. He is currently one of three that the cases are being appealed under the new SC ruling.
Personally I believe he is in the company of like minded individuals....
The three theft-of-honest-services cases the court addressed illustrate the statute's broad range and the lower courts' struggles to limit it. Jeffrey Skilling was convicted on 18 counts of securities fraud, insider trading and lying to Enron's auditors, as well as a conspiracy charge that he deprived Enron and its shareholders of the honest services that he owed them. Conrad Black, the former chair and CEO of Hollinger International, was convicted on three counts of depriving Hollinger of his honest services by paying himself illegitimate "noncompetition" fees that he did not disclose to Hollinger's board of directors. Bruce Weyhrauch, a state representative in Alaska, was charged with soliciting future employment from an oil services company at a time when the legislature was considering tax legislation affecting the company.
U.S. Supreme Court Curtails Federal "Honest Services" Fraud Statute.
Was Black treated any differently than this man?
A Hidalgo County Head Start Program employee is facing criminal charges after he allegedly stole toilet paper and other supplies from work.
Hidalgo County Sheriff’s Office deputies arrested Rogelio Cervantes on a theft by a public servant charge Friday.
Head Start worker jailed in toilet paper theft
Or this woman
Police booked JeniLyn Dusek, 61, of Prescott Valley into the Camp Verde jail on charges of felony theft.
[...]
Dusek told the officer she is in financial trouble, and she estimates she took about $5,000 in cash from the register over the past two years to pay her bills and help out her children.
Store employee arrested on charges of felony theft
or
A former employee was sentenced to 60 days in jail today for stealing $11,250 from the Franklin County Veterans Services Commission.
[...]
Aid to the veterans was not affected, and they did not know their names had been used, Assistant County Prosecutor Jason Moore said.
[...]
Defense attorney Frederick T. Moses said Woodard, a mother of one, stole the money after becoming depressed over finances.
She took money from her retirement funds to make full restitution today and will begin her jail sentence on Tuesday.
Former veterans-services employee sentenced for theft in office
There is one glaring difference between all the cases and it boils down to one key ingredient - money. The last three stayed in jail before being tried as they had no money for bail, they plead or will plead guilty because they can not afford the expense of a trial and they will not be able to afford to appeal their convictions on points of law and SC reversals.
If the justice system in either the US or Canada is screwed up I would say this is where the injustice lies and not that Black et al are rudimentarily treated the same as Mr. Cervantes, Ms. Dusek and Ms. Woodward - the latter two who expressed remorse something also lacking in the Blacks of this world.
LB
In matters of truth and justice, there is no difference between large and small problems, for issues concerning the treatment of people are all the same.
Albert Einstein
Judd
Lord Black is an incredible
Posted on: 07/23/2010 16:37
Lord Black is an incredible egomaniac and autocrat. These traits are common among the most creative and successful business leaders.
As long as there aren't too many of them they can be useful.
graeme
Unfortunately, even a few can
Posted on: 07/23/2010 17:23
Unfortunately, even a few can be enormously destructive of a whole society. (I'm not aware that Black has done anything useful. Above all, he has not provided us with any newspapers that kept us anywhere closely to accurately and impartially informed.)
Alex
Rev. Steven Davis wrote: I'm
Posted on: 07/23/2010 18:07
I'm not a lawyer so I probably just don't understand the fine points of the law, but the obstruction of justice charge as I understood it had to do with Black violating a U.S. court order by removing documents from his office in Toronto. I've always wondered how it is that a U.S. court order had any jurisdiction or validity in Toronto? Wouldn't that be an attempt to apply U.S. law extra-territorially? If someone can explain that, I'd appreciate it.
i am also not a lawyer but this is how I understand it. The US court had jurisdiction over Conrad Black's activities in Canada because he committed or was accused of breaking US law in the US. He was obstructing American investigators who were prosecuting him for US crimes, it does not matter from which country one does that to be guilty. The court does not have jurisdiction over what people do in Canada, unless they are helping someone (themselves or others) in the US break the US laws.
That is why Mark Emery is in a US prison today. He never went to the US, but he mailed pot seeds to US customers. Which is a more questionable case than Black's, because he was never in the US nor did he break any Canadian laws
Black's case would be similar to a Canadian court mandating that a person abstain from drinking or drugs, while out on on bail or when on parole. If the person crossed over the border to the US for an evening, he or she would still be obliged to abstain.
Alex
Judd wrote: Lord Black is an
Posted on: 07/23/2010 18:03
Lord Black is an incredible egomaniac and autocrat. These traits are common among the most creative and successful business leaders.
As long as there aren't too many of them they can be useful.
Black is also a textbook socio-path. In business one socio-path is too many.
His crime was that he stole millions of dollars from investors, but because of technicalities and being able to use the money he stole to pay lawyers he got off. However he destroyed his company. Big Business has a serious problem with socio-paths and in reality they created or build nothing, they steal and take credit for the work of others, eventually destroying their companies, people's lives and stealing from investors, who are often pensioners
Think of Enron, Hollinger and Worldcom (formerly MCI before it was taken over by a socio-path) and other companies that have been destroyed.
Real businessmen who create and build things leave behind a legacy that contribute to society. Socio-paths destroy communities. I believe BP is being run by one.
Alex
graeme wrote: He closes them
Posted on: 07/23/2010 18:38
He closes them because in a discussion, the other person doesn't exist. Conrad only hears himself. He is he complete egoist.
Sociopathy is a type of disability that one is likely born with. They are unable to feel empathy for others. Thus others are only tools. Others are are not real people to them ever. This allows them to believe that the rules that apply to everyone else do not apply to them. They are unable to feel guilt when they hurt others.
Black's whole life has been one of stealing and deception. Black was expelled from Upper Canada college for stealing and selling exams to other students. He conned elderly widows into giving him his money at the start of his career. He stole the Telegraph by conning an elderly person in the early stages of dementia by buying it for one tenth it's worth. He leveraged what he stole (by borrowing against his properties to their real value or above it, by cooking his books. ) to buy other businesses. The only business he ever created was the National Post, which has never made money, and he only did so to serve his ego.
the people who run the local mac's Milk are better business people than him.
He was only caught because he stole from a healthy millionaire who went after him for it, causing his business to collapse like a house of cards because he owed more money than they were worth.
He essential destroyed most of the value in the Telegraph (His biggest asset)by refusing to invest and improve it like other owners would.
ShamanWolf
I'm not a huge fan of Conrad
Posted on: 07/25/2010 10:00
I'm not a huge fan of Conrad Black. I'm not a huge hater either - I think he deserves compassion like any other human being and am frankly sickened by the smug schadenfreude that comprises most of what I hear or read about him. Especially all this Canada shit. Isn't he coming back because of his wife's medical condition? Does he need to like this country to care for his wife? That's bullshit - arrogant, draconian bullshit. (Also, it kind of shows he has some good qualities. I'm not diminishing his bad qualities - he's a complex human being, while everyone on both sides tries to make him an allegorical figure, a paragon of something or other.)
However, a lot of people (Mark Steyn, Barbara Amiel, Margaret Wente, Stardust) say he was framed, but I've never heard anyone give an ounce of evidence on this count, or even seriously challenge the conviction. I haven't followed the case very closely. Can someone tell me on what basis the case against him is considered faulty?
graeme
The law was changed. Part of
Posted on: 07/25/2010 10:11
The law was changed. Part of what he did is no longer against the law. Despicable, but not against the law. (Part - obstruction of justice is still against the law.)
If he wishes to move north for his wife's condition, it's a simple matter to move to Niagara Falls, NY. That way, she would still be in easy reach of medicare which he has publicly condemned.
If his wife's condition is so bad, why did they for so long keep a mansion in Florida? Barbie does not buy mansions to suffer in.
With thousands of people around the world in torture camps, millions atarving, uncounted ones imprisoned (by the US and others) without charge of trial, why are we getting our knickers in a twist over a man who stole tens of millions? And for a couple who, both of them, poured contempt on those "below" them, and never gave a damn for oanyone but themselves?
Yes, it would be Christian to look at them with compassion. I'm just don't see why the Blacks require more compassion than others in far worse shape.
martha
Love him or hate him, I sure
Posted on: 07/26/2010 13:19
Love him or hate him, I sure would vote for him. I know there are some questions about citizenship, but he is 1)born here 2)married to a Canadian.
He's fiscally literate, and he's a social liberal. Discuss.
graeme
He's fiscally literate? He's
Posted on: 07/26/2010 14:31
He's fiscally literate? He's a thief.
He's a social liberal? I knew him quite well at one point, and I have more or less followed his pronouncemennts. What is socially liberal about him? How would he finance social liberalism? He won't even pay his own taxes.
Motheroffive
There are more than questions
Posted on: 07/26/2010 16:15
There are more than questions about his citizenship. When one formally renounces one's citizenship, one is no longer Canadian. And, under normal circumstances, a criminal record results in being deemed inadmissable. There are processes to address both of these facets of his entry (or not) into Canada but they do not proceed with any speed.
Hopefully, our government handles Mr. Black in a manner that's consistent with how others in similar shoes are handled.
graeme
Black seems to have
Posted on: 07/26/2010 22:17
Black seems to have remarkably little policial clout, despite his courting of it. When Bush ended his term, he had the power to give a presidential pardon to Black. All presidents routinely do that sort of thing - and to some very questionable characters. But, despite Black's years of courting the Washington set of both parties, there was no pardon.
He may lack political clout in Ottawa, too - at least until the courts are through with him - not to mention that US tax bill.
Granton
I'm not saying I'm an expert
Posted on: 07/30/2010 12:19
I'm not saying I'm an expert - but I've done a lot of reading about the whole of the trial, charges, etc... And I hate to tell you --- Black did nothing illegal. I am not confusing "wrong" with "illegal" but I can assure you, that his entire conduct and management of Hollinger Inc and Hollinger International was completely above board and followed all of the procedures for audits that any publicly traded company has to follow.
What started it all was the non-compete payments that he received when he sold off some of the chain. The new buyers didn't give a rats butt if in the future if "Hollinger" as a company would be competing against them --- they didn't want "Black" under whatever company competing against them. That's why they wanted to pay him. One investor in Hollinger cried foul - and then it all started.
Black may have been rich - but he wasn't up in the billions and billions stratosphere. Somewhere along the line, he must of done something to upset the US government which went after his with a vengeance.
Before the trial, when the SEC came in and took control over the company he built, they asked if anyone wanted to buy it. Black said I do. The shares are all trading at $7 - I'll buy them all for $12 --- the SEC said no, you can't do that, wouldn't allow the offer to be made, and then proceeded to run the company into the ground, leaving it bankrupt. Well, if I was an investor in Hollinger - I'd be some pissed off at that!
As for the boxes, he was removed from his office in Toronto - took out his personal effects - when he was told the SEC wanted them - which he wasn't told when he was told to get out - he brought them back the next day. Big deal - so there's a video of him with boxes in his hand. I think we can all be assured that whatever "documents" he had in those boxes - someone else had copies of them too.
Remember when he all gasped "Oh my! He stole $500 million from the company!" In the end he was found guilty of an amount around $6 million - still a lot of money - but 1% of the original charges. And then the US supreme court says the law they tried to convict him under, can be applied to this situation. Clearly the government has no case! So of what justice did Black obstruct?
I'm not telling you like him - but he is an innocent man.
Alex
Granton wrote: I'm not
Posted on: 07/30/2010 15:38
I'm not telling you like him - but he is an innocent man.
True, innocent in only the letter of the law and not the spirit. Black and others have demonstrated that capitialism has made stealing legal.
Shopkeepers and small business people are still unable to seatl, but those at the high level just have to know the rules that allow one to steal. If the law is not reformed to prevent Black and others from getting away with conning others and stealing, the system will collapse.
People go to jail for up to 5 years for robbing stores of as little as 100,000. It is only because they do not know how to steal legally that they get away with it.
graeme
The boxes may have been
Posted on: 07/30/2010 21:56
The boxes may have been returned. But we have know way of knowing whether all the papers were in them, no way of knowing whether somebody else had copies, and know way of knowing whether the somebody else wants to reveal them.
He went to his offices late at night. He selected the boxes by himself, and carried them to his car, and drove home with them. Imagine, a multimillionaire who paid people tens of thousands of dollars a day just to listen to him did all that himself. If he wanted something from the boxes, isn't that what he had secretaries and clerks for? What was so urgent that he had to go himself late at night He was breaking the law, and he knew it.
And, contrary to myth, he was not a wonderful newspaper owner. He did close to nothing with The Gazette, and did nobody any favours with his creation of The National Post. Nor was there much innovation at the Telegraph. His ability lay in knowing how to con people (like aged relatives), how to cheat without actually breaking the law, sort of, and how to manipulate share holders.
Black has a long record of cheating and conning, and of feeling that the rules don't apply to him. He is the most self-centred man I have ever met. And Barbie seems to be his match.
graeme
Granton
Then be angry with security
Posted on: 08/03/2010 09:07
Then be angry with security regulators and law makers. Making the most of what the "system" allows is not criminal. To a certain degree, many of us do the same thing, (how many holiday days do I get? When can I cash out my retirement funds to pay the least amount of taxes... how I do minimize my tax obligations... etc...).
Of all people Graeme, I thought you would keep a wary eye on what popular reputation states someone is...
graeme
Taking away boxes he had been
Posted on: 08/03/2010 12:41
Taking away boxes he had been ordered to leave there IS criminal. It's obivous he knew that. Why else the night visit, and him doing the carting? I don't need popular reputation to tell me what Black is. I knew him. I always knew he was an egoist to such a degree as to suggest mental illness. I always knew of his unethical treatment of his own family. I knew his of his theft and sale of exams at his high school. I don't need any popular opinions to know what he is.
He also has a huge and overdue tax bill to the US. That is illegal (like Mulroney "forgetting" his envelopes of money.)
Granton
Point of order Prof. Graeme
Posted on: 08/03/2010 13:14
Point of order Prof. Graeme --- not sure where you are getting this "night" reference to the removal of boxes. You are making it sound like he broke in or something --- think it happened at the end of a regular day of work, during the week he was ordered out of the office. Do you have a source for the midnight sleuthing?
graeme
My understanding was it was
Posted on: 08/03/2010 16:22
My understanding was it was at night. Not that it makes much difference. Have you ever heard of a multimillionaire boss of a large corporation who lugged boxes around himself? And he had been advised of the court order. He knew what he was doing. And he knew the possible consequences. Obviously, there were papers in there that would have made things worse.
In a world in which millions are starving to death, ten of thousands tortured, thousands more held without cause, I'm not going to stay up nights worrying about a man I know to be a thief and an egomaniac, and whose vacation cottage is a $35 million mansion in Florida.
Granton
Still, you've put some
Posted on: 08/04/2010 07:42
Still, you've put some energy into this thread.
And your understanding is wrong. It was in the afternoon -although as you say - not that it makes a world of difference.
MikePaterson
At least the likes of Conrad
Posted on: 08/04/2010 09:40
At least the likes of Conrad have the decency to steal from and defraud the greedy, unscrupulous overly-rich gamblers and parasites of our economy... the ones who want speculative returns without doing any work or making anything useful.
His crimes trickle down, of course, and he certainly did nothing for the quality of news or information available to Canadians (which is possibly what he liked about Babs).
stardust
Update: Conrad Black's
Posted on: 08/21/2010 20:14
Update:
Conrad Black's libel lawsuits OK'd
Last Updated: Friday, August 13, 2010 | 12:26 PM ET CBC News
The Ontario Court of Appeal has given the green light to Conrad Black to pursue libel lawsuits against his American-based employers in the province.
Black filed the suits in Ontario Superior Court over statements about the former media mogul's use of Hollinger International shareholder money.
Hollinger Inc. fired Black and other executives in 2004. In 2006, the company rebranded as the Sun-Times Media Group Inc.
The statements were published on the U.S.-based Hollinger International website, then republished by many media outlets in Ontario.
The defendants argued the Ontario court has no jurisdiction.
But the Appeal Court agreed with Black's lawyers, who say the former media mogul established his reputation in Ontario, so that's where the lawsuits should be heard.
"In my opinion, the facts relevant to Black’s claim relating to publication in Ontario and the damage to Black's Ontario reputation form a significant connection between Black's claims and Ontario," Justice Andromache Karakatsanis said in the ruling.
"Accordingly, in all these circumstances, I would not interfere with the motion judge's finding that there was a real and substantial connection between Black's claim and Ontario."
The court also ordered the defendants in the libel action to pay Black $35,000 in legal expenses.
graeme
Wonderful. I hope it costs
Posted on: 08/21/2010 20:29
Wonderful. I hope it costs both sides a bundle.
jlin
35,000.00 should cover the
Posted on: 08/21/2010 21:04
35,000.00 should cover the cost of a high boot and a new high heel for babs.
FishingDude
"The prosecutors all had
Posted on: 08/21/2010 22:15
"The prosecutors all had toilet seats around their heads!" that was classic line by him. What a way to start off a court session eh?
In another way it could be synonymous with "They were talking out of their asses!"
Just goes to show you can be rich, smug, stink of arrogance and above the law by your social status or monarchy and pay off the system instead of peeling potatoes for the rest of your days or your cell mate giving you a tattoo on your rear end.