Does last week’s Supreme Court ruling vindicate Conrad Black? -

Does last week’s Supreme Court ruling vindicate Conrad Black?



Does last week’s Supreme Court ruling vindicate Conrad Black?

  1. Whatever the court says, he's still guilty of atrocious journalism.

    • Unfortunately that is not a criminal offense although there should be some punishment for bad or lazy journalism.

  2. The CBC should be sold to Conrad Black for a dollar, he has a proven track record of success in media and he could make the CBC worth watching. Conrad Black was railroaded by media and unethical prosecutors and even though owning the CBC would be more of a burden than compensation, he has the character to appreciate such a challenge.

    • If we're going to sell the CBC to a private citizen, I at least want it sold to a citizen of Canada.

      I don't think that's too much to ask.

  3. Conrad Black may be an S.O.B but that wasn't the charges on which he was convicted. In my opinion, his only real transgression was his so called obstruction of justice secured by an over zealous Prosecutor because he had no other case. Usually, failure to abide by a court order results in a slap on the hand upon satisfaction of the intent of that court order which, presumably, was to preserve evidence. I don't think the courts even cared what was removed from C.B.'s office. It could have been love letters he didn't want his wife to see. Jail time was ridiculous.

    • What about Brian Mulroney?

  4. The law on which the charges were brought were far too ambiguous and actually dangerous for a free and democratic country that proclaims rule of law. The obstruction of justice charges were subsequent and subject to the original charges that have been reversed so the obstruction charges should be thrown out also whereas they would not have existed were it not for the original charges.

  5. While it can be argued that health care and financial reform are overdue, annd what is proposed is only a band-aid, the U.S. justice system is beyond the stage that the political process can fix it.
    Due process, the very foundation of the system when it was introduced with the constitution is in the same category as a Doug Flutie (:Hail Mary pass) and then even if completed, the court of last resort does not have the guts to apply its own conclusion.

    The prosecution, administration and trying of this case were
    all a sham. Unfortunately, the political system as it exists today in the U.S. would not dare to touch it. It is the American equivalent of a "Sacred Cow"


  6. They ought to keep Black in prison and others like him and throw away the keys

  7. George Waugh said it exactly.
    Judy, you are just showing your ignorance

  8. I feel that Conrad Black is the victim of an American Justice system that exercises economic warfare and discrimination towards outsiders. To be convicted for carrying a cardboard box out of your workplace in another country is a travesty – a grotesque incongruity of a broken system!

  9. A crook is a crook no matter how you you paint him, ask the Loblaws employees who had their pensions taken by him in the late 1960s. Justice was served when they first convicted him..I hope he rots in jail !

    • It was Dominion.

  10. The prosecution at Black's original trial was actually able to suborn perjury by threatening criminal action against three board members auditing Hollinger accounts who though highly accomplished (e.g. former state governor) suddenly pretended they read the accounts, initialed each page but did not see or sign off on the non-compete payments to Black.

    This kind of corrosive class envy trying to bring a wealthy wealth-creating man down lost investors, many of them "the little guy" over a billion ultimately. The share holder who started the whole witch hunt regretted his actions later as his shares plunged to worthlessness. He had shot himself and his fellow investors in the foot by insisting that the man who had made him money should have made him more money (i.e. divide the non-compete payments among share holders…funny, the buyers weren't worried that anyone other than Black was capable of starting up a new rival newspaper).

  11. Conrad Black is an arrogant, sneering, nasty ass but, if that were a criminal offence, we could not build enough jails. The non-competes were a tax avoidance move (used by many publishers) that did not benefit all shareholders equally but were in the contracts the board approved. What was obvious, to anyone with a modicum of media sense, during Black's tenure was that he got a fabulous deal on the sales of papers, especially the sale to the Aspers. Even people with no media sense can see clearly now that the Hollinger shareholders were far better off financially with him at the helm. Could shareholders trust him to put their interests first? Of course not! However, could anyone name me a corporation where the executive and board do put the shareholders' interests anywhere near first? As Adam Smith pointed out in "The Money Game," stock markets are a method for companies to raise money, not for shareholders to make money. Caveat Emptor!

  12. If mr Black gets 6yrs for his crimes what should they give all the bank exc. that just about put the world into deep recesson

    • I agree – as I agree with most of the other comments – spite and jealousy is what took Conrad Black down – not any real search for justice or truth. I don't think any successful man has to be necessarily a "nice guy" and maybe Conrad Black isn't – but he didn't deserve the railroading that he suffered.

  13. Back is Black.

  14. Black is yesterdays news. A pox on him.

  15. Re the Conrad Black saga, justice may or may not have been served. However, prior to his present incarceration, Conrad traded his Canadian citizenship for a title. If given the choice, would he now be willing to forego his title to regain his Canadian citizenship? His title is not an asset in his present situation, but Canadian citizenship might be much more valuable. If his title means more to him than being a Canadian, many will still refer to him as "Ex-Con Conrad" — not "Lord Conrad".

    Regardless many will always