Conrad Black Asks Judge to Overturn Jury Verdict

Press baron Conrad Black has filed a formal request for his trial judge to overturn his convictions, claiming that there was insufficient evidence for jurors to find him guilty of mail fraud and obstruction of justice.^[1] In a series of motions to Chicago's federal court, Black's federal criminal defense lawyers demand either immediate acquittal or a fresh trial, arguing that "no rational jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt" that the former Telegraph owner deliberately stole $6.5m from his Hollinger media empire.^[2]

The instant motion will represent the last chance for Judge Amy St. Eve to throw out the jury verdict before Black's sentencing hearing, which is scheduled to happen in November.^[3]

"It is a pretty rare case when a trial judge reverses herself, so I suspect that the chances of Lord Black prevailing at this stage are less than one in ten….He probably has a better shot on appeal," asserted Hugh Totten, a Chicago federal attorney.^[4]

Federal criminal defense lawyer Marc Martin says Judge St Eve was wrong to give the jury a so-called "ostrich instruction" which allowed a conviction if they felt that Black had displayed willful blindness to the asserted wrongdoing.^[5]

"An ostrich, or conscious avoidance, instruction is warranted only in rare circumstances where a defendant suspected wrongdoing or deliberately avoided the truth," argued Martin, who says the government failed to produce evidence that Black took deliberate steps to avoid knowledge of any crimes.^[6]

The defense went on to say that the only evidence linking Black to the theft of phony "non-compete" payments from Hollinger was the word of his former business partner, David Radler.^[7] Additionally, Radler's evidence was given under a plea agreement, and it should have been allowed to call sentencing experts as witnesses to explain to jurors how his co-operation was reducing his punishment.^[8]

The US government is pushing for the 62-year-old peer to serve between 15 and 20 years in jail, although legal commentators believe a more likely sentence is between five and 10 years' imprisonment.^[9]

Federal criminal attorney Douglas McNabb has also previously discussed mail fraud in his blog, here; and a further discussion of the Conrad Black case can be found here.

---

^[1] Andrew Clark, Conrad Black asks judge to quash convictions, Guardian Unlimited, August 28, 2007, available at http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2157624,00.html (last visited August 29, 2007).
^[2] Id.
^[3] Id.
^[4] Id.
^[5] Id.
^[6] Id.
^[7] Id.
^[8] Id.
^[9] Id.