tale of the tape

Courtesy of the Hill Times, we now know what Tom Zytaruk thinks about the is-it-or-isn’t-it-a-gag-order settlement agreement that ended the Prime Minister’s lawsuit against the Liberal Party: 

.. in today’s edition of Surrey Now:

And so begins the countdown to an eleventh hour attempt by Team Harper – now minus one of the best defamation lawyers in Canada – to make this case go away:

It seems that Canadian Press resident Cadmanologist Tim Naumetz also got hold of the “leaked” report in question – no prize for guessing who seems to have leaked it, by the way.

Why, look, the Prime Minister has, in the words of the National Post, “[broken] his silence” on the Cadman Affair – and just hours before the advertising blackout kicks in, which means that the Liberal Party – which, of course, Harper has sued for defamation, won’t be able to respond publicly until after the election:
Harper gave an exclusive interview Monday to Global BC in which he again challenged the casette tape on which journalist Tom Zytaruk asked him about an alleged attempt by Conservative officials to buy a vote from dying Independent MP Chuck Cadman with a $1-million life insurance policy.

The prime minister said even Cadman’s widow, Dona Cadman – who’s running this election as a Tory candidate, denies there was an attempt to bribe her late husband.

“She certainly doesn’t believe that and that’s why she’s running as a candidate in this election,” Harper said in the interview.

“She’s told in court proceedings what she knows. Fact of the matter is, as I’ve said before, this is all based on an allegation on a tape that has been edited and is an incomplete conversation.”

Harper launched a $3.5-million defamation lawsuit against the Liberal Party after the party posted articles on its website accusing Harper of knowing that the bribe would be offered, an allegation he denied.

Earlier this week, an Ontario judge ordered another analysis of the tape and Harper asked former FBI agent Bruce Koenig to do the job. Koenig said the portion of the tape dealing with the insurance policy “contains neither physical nor electronic splices, edits or alterations,” according to a report entered in court on Friday. […]

In the Global BC interview, Harper said some parts were doctored and others were not. However, “a doctored tape is a doctored tape,” he said.

“These various expert reports disagree on some details . . . they all agree that the tape has been significantly doctored and that’s a fact.”
“They all agree”? A statement seemingly at odds with reality – or, at least, the opinion of his own audio expert  – whose report the PM’s lawyers attempted to suppress until after the election – who concluded that the exchange at the heart of the dispute was not, in fact edited:
[F]ormer FBI agent Bruce Koenig, the sound expert Harper hired to prove his allegations, submitted a report dated Friday to Harper’s lawyer, which also had to be sent to the Liberal lawyer Chris Paliare.

In the report, Koenig concluded that the first part of Zytaruk’s interview with Harper, which contains the key portions that the prime minister has contested, was intact.

The second part, beginning roughly one minute and 41 seconds into the tape, was a new recording that was made over the final part of the original recording, he said. But the first crucial minute and 41 seconds had not been altered.

Koenig reported that the tape “contains neither physical nor electronic splices, edits or alterations, except for the over-recording start that erased and replaced the end of the first part of the designated interview.”
The expert hired by the Liberals, however, found differently, according to the Post:
[…]In a strange twist, a CTV News reported Monday that an analysis on the tape by experts tapped by the Liberal Party found the tape had likely been altered, contradicting Koenig’s finding.

Except that’s not quite right, as it turns out. (Really, did anyone think it would be that simple? Has anything about this saga ever been simple?)

The full transcript is available here.

9:30:45 AM
Hi everyone! I’m back! Not only am I back, but just a few short hours after tumbling out of a Westjet plane, I’m sitting outside an otherwise entirely unextraordinary courtroom, waiting for the first open hearing in the Cadman trial to get underway. This morning, lawyers for the Prime Minister will attempt to persuade the judge to toss out that affidavit filed by the Liberal Party last month — you remember, the one with all those ugly words like “authoritarian” — arguing that the aforementioned PM is acting like a great big bully by trying to gag the party from using the Cadman tape as a defence in the upcoming libel suit, which looks like it might end up in front of a judge right in the middle of the election campaign.

Don’t worry, I’ll be back on duty later tonight, and you can bet that I’ll have plenty to say about the most recent developments in the Cadman case:

Calling all law-talking guys (and girls) – actual, amateur and armchair alike:

I finally managed to track down Dona Cadman’s second affidavit, which was sworn last Wednesday. I was going to say that there are no real surprises in it, but actually, that in itself was a bit of a surprise. I’ll admit that I was expecting a little more in the way of context – maybe a more detailed description of how — and where — Zytaruk and Harper met, since that appears to be the most significant disagreement between the two versions of events. Then again, it is billed as a supplementary affidavit. The exhibits might be helpful, though. I’m trying to get hold of them, and will post them if I do.

Okay, so I wish I could say that, after typing up the various eyewitness accounts of that fateful September afternoon encounter between Stephen Harper and Tom Zytaruk, I’m a little less confused over what, exactly, happened, but sadly, that’s not the case. Oh well, it was worth a shot — and who knows, maybe someone else will be able to tie this mess of loose ends into a pert little bow.

ALSO NEW AND FRESH AND WORTH CLICKING: Read Dona Cadman’s supplementary affidavit here.