Our amicus brief argument on the 
Sir Conrad Black case


 
Hominum sententia fallax "the judgmental opinions of men is fallible"
Its about time Conrad Black was exonerated as he was never rightly accused of anything! Nor should he have been imprisoned before having the chance to clear himself on appeal against these baseless charges, (he wasn't leaving town or anything). 


The Trial Judge can only be described as persistently in a delusional sort of fixation in negating a man for no apparent reason other than he is not the openly venomous type that has been set upon him from the outset. It was them "collectively" that endangered the shareholders (who lost a great fortune from Blacks departure) rather than Conrad Blacks conduct having been the reason for this. As such she is altogether seeming "out of line" with the facts of the case and its complete lack of merit - to the point of making her role in this altogether irrelevant on the right basis of judicial incompetence - no less!

The Press is equally in on this with only some rare exceptions. At this time the man stands convicted only of one count of "Obstruction" as he was found Not Guilty on almost All the fraud charged against him and what he was wrongly convicted of was rejected on appeal - based on the honesty of his case.
Get off of it huh! You almost killed this man with incessant threats of a century behind bars when he has been all along innocent. The monies he was paid as "non compete payments" are completely an honest and valid way to have given value to all involved - including the Hollinger shareholders who benefited from this.

Decisions on executive compensation and matters relating to disposal of corporate assets such as an individual Newspaper within a chain, are matters for the Board and cannot be viewed as an exigency requiring an urgent consultation with individual shareholders of a large Publicly held company. When personal issues arise such as the involvement of a personal guarantee of a Company President in respect of his own employment prospects in the future (by offering a non-compete guarantee to a buyer of a corporate asset as indicated) the issues involved can be resolved by a Board ratification of the arrangement rather than asking for shareholder involvement where the circumstances can clearly enough
 be dealt with by a conscientious quorum of company members and oversight professionals attached to the firm.

As such the press is practicing propaganda tactics of not making all this clear. You have to be a nut like George bush before you can set the rules on this continent - failing which they simply seem to act like a bunch of banana republicans - Press and all!

If Conrad Black hadn't taken the money in that he received for granting non-compete arrangements - his company (Hollinger) would have been the biggest likely losers - as the buyers would have rightly been entitled to just walk away.

Conrad Black has the genius of a following to take over in any town a newspaper already exists - and those that paid him not to compete did so to deprive him of his freedom to do so as would normally would be the case.

We were pleased to undertake a project to reach 100,000 top lawyers internationally (mainly in the United states and some countries in Europe including the UK) with a couple of rounds of emailed documents intended to clear Conrad Black on all charges. We did this just prior to the matter being referred to appeal in Chicago initially. We are pleased with the response. The documents were also sent as an amicus offering directly to the judges at the appeal level in Illinois.

Our latest (imprimatur) pending effort at the courts

Beneficium dignis ubi des, omnes obligas 
"Where you confer a benefit on the worthy, you oblige all men"

 


Mr. Michael Rizzo Chessman, Leader - Euro Coalition