Conrad Black and ex-Enron chief Jeff Skilling’s convictions set aside
James Bone TIMES of LONDON 
Lord Black of Crossharbour won a symbolic victory in the US Supreme Court today after years of appeals against his conviction for looting his newspaper empire. The former Telegraph chairman, currently serving six-and-a-half years in the Coleman prison in Florida, could take satisfaction from the ruling.
Miguel Estrada, Black’s lawyer, said that he was “obviously pleased” by the Supreme Court decision.
“We are confident that the lower courts will quickly conclude that the errors that the Supreme Court has now conclusively found tainted every aspect of the case,” he said. “We look forward to helping Mr Black regain his freedom.”
Other analysts said that the Supreme Court decision was unlikely to lead to Black’s early release.
“Conrad Black did not get the exoneration he requested but only a technical victory on law,” said his biographer Tom Bower, the author of Conrad and Lady Black: Dancing on the Edge.
“His fate depends on the Chicago appeal court which has already declared him to be guilty of fraud.” Black was convicted of three counts of fraud and one count of obstruction of justice after a trial in Chicago in 2007.
He was accused of taking cash out of the company in the form of bogus “non-compete” payments, and then covering up his crimes. CCTV footage showed him moving boxes of documents out of his office in Toronto into his car when investigators closed in. The peer, who continues to write newspaper columns from behind bars, has said that prison time has expanded his social circle.
His wife, better known as the columnist Barbara Amiel, continues to spend time at their mansion in Palm Beach so she can be close to her husband. Black appealed to the Supreme Court against the scope of the so-called “honest services” law used to convict him. The 28-word law, passed by Congress in 1988, makes it a crime for public officials and executives to deprive those they work for of their honest services.
During a hearing on Black’s appeal one Supreme Court justice asked if a worker was denying his employer his honest services if he read the Daily Racing Form at work. In a related case involving former Enron chief executive Jeffrey Skilling, the Supreme Court ruled that the honest services law could be used only where there was evidence of bribes or kickbacks.
The justices ordered that the Seventh Circuit appeals court look again at Black’s fraud conviction.
At his Chicago trial the jury was instructed that Black could be convicted of fraud if he either stole money or deprived shareholders of his honest services.
The Supreme Court suggested that his fraud convictions could be set aside if jurors relied on the judge’s over-broad interpretation of the honest services law.
In the Seventh Circuit’s earlier opinion Judge Richard Posner wrote that Black was guilty of plain old-fashioned fraud not just theft of honest services.
“The evidence established a conventional fraud, that is, a theft of money or other property from Hollinger by misrepresentations and misleading omissions amounting to fraud,” Judge Posner wrote.
Even if Black’s fraud convictions were to be thrown out he would still face the same amount of time in prison.
He was sentenced to six-and-a-half years for obstruction of justice and three years for fraud, to run concurrently — and the obstruction charge is unaffected by the Supreme Court decision.
Skilling, who is serving 24 years for his role in the collapse of the Houston-based energy giant Enron, could fare better.
The former Enron boss was convicted of 19 counts including conspiracy, insider trading and lying to auditors.
The Supreme Court strongly suggested that the fraud counts against him should be thrown out by a lower court because they did not violate its more stringent interpretation of the “honest services” law.
“Because Skilling’s misconduct entailed no bribe or kickback he did not conspire to commit honest-services fraud under our confined construction” of the law,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said.
Lord Black of Crossharbour won a symbolic victory in the US Supreme Court today after years of appeals against his conviction for looting his newspaper empire. The former Telegraph chairman, currently serving six-and-a-half years in the Coleman prison in Florida, could take satisfaction from the ruling.
Miguel Estrada, Black’s lawyer, said that he was “obviously pleased” by the Supreme Court decision.
“We are confident that the lower courts will quickly conclude that the errors that the Supreme Court has now conclusively found tainted every aspect of the case,” he said. “We look forward to helping Mr Black regain his freedom.”
Other analysts said that the Supreme Court decision was unlikely to lead to Black’s early release.
“Conrad Black did not get the exoneration he requested but only a technical victory on law,” said his biographer Tom Bower, the author of Conrad and Lady Black: Dancing on the Edge.
“His fate depends on the Chicago appeal court which has already declared him to be guilty of fraud.” Black was convicted of three counts of fraud and one count of obstruction of justice after a trial in Chicago in 2007.
He was accused of taking cash out of the company in the form of bogus “non-compete” payments, and then covering up his crimes. CCTV footage showed him moving boxes of documents out of his office in Toronto into his car when investigators closed in. The peer, who continues to write newspaper columns from behind bars, has said that prison time has expanded his social circle.
His wife, better known as the columnist Barbara Amiel, continues to spend time at their mansion in Palm Beach so she can be close to her husband. Black appealed to the Supreme Court against the scope of the so-called “honest services” law used to convict him. The 28-word law, passed by Congress in 1988, makes it a crime for public officials and executives to deprive those they work for of their honest services.
During a hearing on Black’s appeal one Supreme Court justice asked if a worker was denying his employer his honest services if he read the Daily Racing Form at work. In a related case involving former Enron chief executive Jeffrey Skilling, the Supreme Court ruled that the honest services law could be used only where there was evidence of bribes or kickbacks.
The justices ordered that the Seventh Circuit appeals court look again at Black’s fraud conviction.
At his Chicago trial the jury was instructed that Black could be convicted of fraud if he either stole money or deprived shareholders of his honest services.
The Supreme Court suggested that his fraud convictions could be set aside if jurors relied on the judge’s over-broad interpretation of the honest services law.
In the Seventh Circuit’s earlier opinion Judge Richard Posner wrote that Black was guilty of plain old-fashioned fraud not just theft of honest services.
“The evidence established a conventional fraud, that is, a theft of money or other property from Hollinger by misrepresentations and misleading omissions amounting to fraud,” Judge Posner wrote.
Even if Black’s fraud convictions were to be thrown out he would still face the same amount of time in prison.
He was sentenced to six-and-a-half years for obstruction of justice and three years for fraud, to run concurrently — and the obstruction charge is unaffected by the Supreme Court decision.
Skilling, who is serving 24 years for his role in the collapse of the Houston-based energy giant Enron, could fare better.
The former Enron boss was convicted of 19 counts including conspiracy, insider trading and lying to auditors.
The Supreme Court strongly suggested that the fraud counts against him should be thrown out by a lower court because they did not violate its more stringent interpretation of the “honest services” law.
“Because Skilling’s misconduct entailed no bribe or kickback he did not conspire to commit honest-services fraud under our confined construction” of the law,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said.
No comments:
Post a Comment