Comments on: About that $100,000, Ken . . . http://backofthebook.ca/2007/06/06/about-that-100000-ken/1284/ Politics, tech, media, culture and more, from a Canadian point-of-view Sat, 12 May 2012 22:58:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: ken whyte http://backofthebook.ca/2007/06/06/about-that-100000-ken/1284/#comment-356 ken whyte Sun, 05 Aug 2007 17:42:00 +0000 http://backofthebook.ca/2007/06/06/about-that-100000-ken/#comment-356 Dear Frank: You ask what I was doing taking $100,000 from Black in 2003, almost two years after Black had sold the National Post. It is entirely true that I received the money at the beginning of 2003. It is also a fact that I was awarded the bonus in 2001. As I testified in discovery for my lawsuit against Hollinger -- the same testimony referenced by prosecutors in the Black trial -- Black informed me that I would receive the bonus shortly after he sold his final stake in the Post: "August of 2001," I said under oath, "was when the announcement of the second 50 percent being sold was made. It wasn't long after that." Elsewhere in the same testimony I said that I was awarded the bonus "sometime not too long after the announcement," and certainly "before December" of that year. I was still under contract to Hollinger throughout this period. I did not receive an employment letter from CanWest until January 2, 2002. The first paragraph of that document states: "This will outline the terms and conditions of employment with which we want to go forward with you. Since the transaction to acquire 50% of the National Post does not close until March 31, 2002, we are writing this in the capacity of manager, soon to be 100% owner." There was nothing untoward about my accepting a performance bonus from Hollinger while employed by Hollinger.<br /><br />While the bonus was promised me towards the end of 2001, I didn't receive it until the end of 2002 -- a few months, not years, after I left Black's employ. I gave an explanation for Black's delay in my testimony for the lawsuit: "Dealing with Conrad, he had a very precise memory but he wasn't always quick about things, and so I was always reminding him about things to do with my compensation and my deal. From the time I started with him, he always needed a nudge." To the same point, it took Black a year from the time I started working full-time on the National Post to arrange my compensation as a Post employee (I was paid under the terms of my Saturday Night agreement in the interim). I think I was the last of the "day one" National Post employees to come to terms with the company precisely because I was the only one who dealt directly with Black.<br /><br />As I testified during my lawsuit against Hollinger, I received the $100,000 bonus cheque in the mail towards the end of 2002 and deposited it in my bank, taking receipt of the funds, early in 2003.<br /><br />During my cross-examination at the Black trial, prosecutors made selective use of my testimony from the lawsuit, noting simply that the Post was sold in 2001 and that I received my bonus in 2003. It is the job of prosecutors to attempt to damage the credibility of defense witnesses in the eyes of the jury. On redirect, Black's lawyers were naturally more concerned with shoring up portions of my testimony relevant to their client than they were with filling gaps in my compensation history. As far as I could tell, they hadn't read my testimony from the lawsuit. As a witness, I was only permitted to respond to questions asked. None of the reporters or columnists or bloggers who mentioned my bonus thought to contact me before publishing.<br /><br />As for your thoughts on conspiracies in media circles, I couldn't agree more. Standing outside the Chicago courtroom one day, I noticed that all of the assembled print reporters -- NY Times, NY Post, Globe & Mail, Toronto Star, Toronto Sun, National Post -- had worked for me in some capacity at some point in their careers. They all mentioned my appearance in their articles. Not one of them remarked on my brilliance as a witness. Obviously, the fix was in. Dear Frank: You ask what I was doing taking $100,000 from Black in 2003, almost two years after Black had sold the National Post. It is entirely true that I received the money at the beginning of 2003. It is also a fact that I was awarded the bonus in 2001. As I testified in discovery for my lawsuit against Hollinger — the same testimony referenced by prosecutors in the Black trial — Black informed me that I would receive the bonus shortly after he sold his final stake in the Post: “August of 2001,” I said under oath, “was when the announcement of the second 50 percent being sold was made. It wasn’t long after that.” Elsewhere in the same testimony I said that I was awarded the bonus “sometime not too long after the announcement,” and certainly “before December” of that year. I was still under contract to Hollinger throughout this period. I did not receive an employment letter from CanWest until January 2, 2002. The first paragraph of that document states: “This will outline the terms and conditions of employment with which we want to go forward with you. Since the transaction to acquire 50% of the National Post does not close until March 31, 2002, we are writing this in the capacity of manager, soon to be 100% owner.” There was nothing untoward about my accepting a performance bonus from Hollinger while employed by Hollinger.

While the bonus was promised me towards the end of 2001, I didn’t receive it until the end of 2002 — a few months, not years, after I left Black’s employ. I gave an explanation for Black’s delay in my testimony for the lawsuit: “Dealing with Conrad, he had a very precise memory but he wasn’t always quick about things, and so I was always reminding him about things to do with my compensation and my deal. From the time I started with him, he always needed a nudge.” To the same point, it took Black a year from the time I started working full-time on the National Post to arrange my compensation as a Post employee (I was paid under the terms of my Saturday Night agreement in the interim). I think I was the last of the “day one” National Post employees to come to terms with the company precisely because I was the only one who dealt directly with Black.

As I testified during my lawsuit against Hollinger, I received the $100,000 bonus cheque in the mail towards the end of 2002 and deposited it in my bank, taking receipt of the funds, early in 2003.

During my cross-examination at the Black trial, prosecutors made selective use of my testimony from the lawsuit, noting simply that the Post was sold in 2001 and that I received my bonus in 2003. It is the job of prosecutors to attempt to damage the credibility of defense witnesses in the eyes of the jury. On redirect, Black’s lawyers were naturally more concerned with shoring up portions of my testimony relevant to their client than they were with filling gaps in my compensation history. As far as I could tell, they hadn’t read my testimony from the lawsuit. As a witness, I was only permitted to respond to questions asked. None of the reporters or columnists or bloggers who mentioned my bonus thought to contact me before publishing.

As for your thoughts on conspiracies in media circles, I couldn’t agree more. Standing outside the Chicago courtroom one day, I noticed that all of the assembled print reporters — NY Times, NY Post, Globe & Mail, Toronto Star, Toronto Sun, National Post — had worked for me in some capacity at some point in their careers. They all mentioned my appearance in their articles. Not one of them remarked on my brilliance as a witness. Obviously, the fix was in.

]]> By: doug http://backofthebook.ca/2007/06/06/about-that-100000-ken/1284/#comment-357 doug Thu, 07 Jun 2007 19:38:00 +0000 http://backofthebook.ca/2007/06/06/about-that-100000-ken/#comment-357 Great stuff. Kudos. Maclean's coverage of the trial stinks of self dealing from A to Z. If conrad walks the ensuing "clusterfuck" will produce a satanic spawn of self congratulation biblical in proportion. Great stuff. Kudos. Maclean’s coverage of the trial stinks of self dealing from A to Z. If conrad walks the ensuing “clusterfuck” will produce a satanic spawn of self congratulation biblical in proportion.

]]>