Despite the positive opinion even his persecutors have of him, Conrad’s motion was denied today. There is apparently no end to the justice system’s wish to unfairly lambast Conrad’s reputation. I would expect that an appeal would be filed promptly and I sincerely hope the appellate court has the good sense to at least give Conrad’s attorneys a chance to properly examine the government’s inappropriately submitted (and apparently quite shady) declarations.
1 2
4 Comments
Dear ACL,
I forwarded your comment to Conrad. He asked me to inform you that he would personally respond to your comment on the morning of June 24, 2011, via this message board.
Sincerely,
Joe Fosco
Thank you. It will be interesting to see what he has to say.
Dear Writer,
You have been thoroughly brainwashed. I had absolutely nothing to do with the operation of the Chicago Sun-Times, and more than Radler had with the operation of the London Daily Telegraph. I visited it twice and warned him he had to stop asinine gestures like shutting off the escalators, and had to strengthen the product. I approved the acquisition of new presses and a new printing location to liberate the paper from Gutenberg-era presses and get it functioning properly. In a technical sense, and I approved the engagement of new editors from elsewhere in our group, which helped to strengthen the product.
The Sun-Times was certainly not profitable when we bought it; it was chronically unprofitable and on the inexorable road to bankruptcy. It became profitable under our ownership, and I approved the acquisition of many of the community newspapers in the Chicago area that helped to make it a profitable group before the bloodsuckers who succeeded us lifted $300 million for themselves and managed the property into bankruptcy.
It is clear from the evidence in the long proceedings that have ensued that Radler cheated all of us, especially me, and then to cut his downside, perjured himself repeatedly to try to incriminate us and reduce the penalty for his own crimes. All charges against me were either not proceeded with, abandoned, rejected by the jurors, or vacated by the Supreme Court. What we have now are two counts retrieved, by the most obtuse treatment of repressed, confected, or distorted evidence, by the appellate panel chairman excoriated by a unanimous Supreme Court and then instructed to assess the gravity of his own errors.
I accept that it is a complicated fact and legal situation, but I resent being accused of offenses of which I have been judged not guilty, and being associated with someone with whose conduct I was proved not to have been associated, and of which conduct I was the principal victim.
Yours sincerely,
Conrad Black
According to a close source of the Black camp, “we thought the hearing a success, since the judge said she would attach minimal weight to the government’s latest smear job, and the prosecution retreated a long way in their comments, and the judge said Black is free to subpoena witnesses if he wanted. The Probation Officer spoke in Black’s favor.”
In my opinion, it appears as if the Chicago media is portraying that Black is in real trouble come Friday. All I have learned from the media is the inaccurate information reported via the affidavits from the prison officials.
Sources close to Black say, “It is a close call, though if she does send Black back to prison, it will be very briefly. Overall, it looks as if Black won most of the battle.