Black bids to delay start of sentence

Disgraced media mogul Conrad Black’s plea for an emergency delay to the start of his six-and-a-half year jail sentence for fraud should be denied, US prosecutors said today.

Black bids to delay start of sentence

Disgraced media mogul Conrad Black’s plea for an emergency delay to the start of his six-and-a-half year jail sentence for fraud should be denied, US prosecutors said today.

Lord Black of Crossharbour was ordered to report to prison by March 3 after a jury found he illegally received $3.5m as they convicted him of three counts of fraud and one of obstruction of justice last year.

US prosecutors said that an emergency request by lawyers for the 63-year-old former owner of the Daily Telegraph that he should remain free on bail pending the outcome of an appeal should be denied.

In documents filed with the Seventh US Circuit Court of Appeals this afternoon, the prosecutors said Black and his co-defendants were engaging in a “herculean” effort in their “nearly insurmountable” task of persuading the court of their argument for a reversal or a new trial.

Prosecutors, led by US district attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, wrote: “Because none of the issues raised satisfies their burden to show a substantial question likely to result in reversal or a new trial, the motion should be denied.

“Throughout their motion appellants engage in herculean efforts to make what is essentially a sufficiency of the evidence appeal – and a weak one at that - appear to be something else.”

The 47-page document went on: “In the process, they omit important facts, misdescribe others, attribute arguments to the government it never made, and assume this court will view the evidence in the light most favourable to their defence.

“Appellants attempt, for example, to portray a straightforward honest services fraud charge – which the district court described as ’not at the periphery but near the core of prohibited ’scheme[s] ... to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services,” – as a novel or even ’dangerous’ theory presenting substantial legal questions.

“Appellants realise the nearly insurmountable task ahead in convincing the court that their sufficiency arguments present substantial questions likely to result in reversal or a new trial.”

Last year, a jury at the Dirksen federal courthouse in Chicago found Black “violated” his duty to shareholders when he swindled them out of more than six million dollars (£2.96 million) in a fraud conspiracy with three colleagues.

And last month, trial judge Amy St Eve denied Black’s original request to remain free on bail pending his appeal.

In their motion to the appeals court earlier this month, Black’s defence team said the deadline for reporting to prison might pass before the court makes its decision on whether to allow their client to stay free on bail.

“A brief delay of applicants’ surrender date until after this court rules on the application does not prejudice any party or undermine the goals of the justice system,” they told the court.

Black was joined in his emergency motion by Peter Atkinson and John Boultbee, two former Hollinger executives who were also convicted following the trial of more than three months.

x

More in this section

Cookie Policy Privacy Policy Brand Safety FAQ Help Contact Us Terms and Conditions

© Examiner Echo Group Limited