Conrad Black promised back in 2003, when the first serious questions were being raised by shareholders about his conduct as chairman and chief executive of Hollinger International, that some day the "definitive version of events" would be spelled out with his "customary generosity". As allegations of financial malfeasance multiplied, Lord Black vowed to drive a "silver stake" through the heart of every one of the accusations.
But at the close of the first substantive week of his criminal trial in Chicago, the bombastic confidence of the former media baron who once took on Rupert Murdoch seemed muted.
"It went well, I think," Lord Black murmured in response to a reporter's query as he was leaving the courtroom with his wife, Barbara Amiel, by his side.
To be sure, there were some minor victories for Lord Black and his three co-defendants, other former executives at the newspaper publisher who have been accused of defrauding shareholders of $60m (£30.6m). For one, a shadowy image has emerged of David Radler, Lord Black's former business partner, who pleaded guilty to fraud charges in 2005 and is expected to be the government's star witness.
In opening statements and in some testimony, it is Mr Radler, not Lord Black, who appears to be at the centre of a series of transactions that lies at the heart of the government's case.
"Would you buy a used car from him?" one defence attorney asked the jury rhetorically.
Ron Safer, an attorney for Mark Kipnis, former Hollinger general counsel, pointed to several documents that showed that KPMG, Hollinger's auditors, and Torys, outside counsel, were aware of many of the allegedly improper transactions, also bolstering Lord Black's case.
But there were wins for the government, too. After years of promising he would deliver a stirring defence against the accusations that have been lodged against him, the opening statement of Edward Genson, Lord Black's attorney, lacked punch.
Unnamed corporate governance activists had made Lord Black the victim, not a perpetrator, of a crime, Mr Genson asserted, before delving into a long explanation of how the transactions under scrutiny – while not necessarily improper – had occurred in geographical areas that were under Mr Radler's watch.
Lord Black's personal life melded with his private life, Mr Genson said, as one way to explain why Lord Black charged Hollinger for a dinner in honour of his wife that was attended by company directors. The reasoning may not explain why the company also footed the bill for clothes and a purse for Lady Black.
Mr Genson's co-counsel, "Fast Eddie" Greenspan, the most famous defence attorney in Canada, fell short of expectations when his lack of familiarity with US trial law led to missed opportunities during the cross-examination of Gordon Paris, a board director who led the internal Hollinger probe. While Mr Genson tried to convince the jury not to judge Lord Black on his "bad attitude" and oratory flair, Lord Black's own words, captured in e-mails read aloud in court, including one in which he discussed "hosing down" Hollinger's public shareholders, appeared to reveal more than just an arrogant streak.
At one point, Eric Sussman, the lead prosecutor in the case, paused while reading an e-mail to the jury to inquire how to pronounce the word "calumnies". Lord Black remained silent but nodded to acknowledge when one attorney got it right.
Mr Sussman proved his mettle against Mr Genson despite the veteran defence attorney's musings about the age difference between himself and the government attorney, who looks younger than his 37 years. In one jibe, he referred dismissively to Mr Sussman as "one of these young people".
In a break the next day, with the jury and judge and most reporters out of sight, Mr Genson, bickering with Mr Sussman, remarked that the government attorney should get his "Social Security number" – an identification card Americans usually acquire as teenagers. Mr Sussman shot back by telling Mr Genson he should live long enough to see the day.
Mr Genson's focus on age is curious given that the most powerful person in the court, Judge Amy St Eve, who sometimes keeps a pencil tucked behind her ear and sips Diet Coke behind the bench, could be Mr Sussman's slightly older sister.
A former counsel on the Whitewater investigation during the Clinton years, Judge St Eve was named in Crain's "40 under 40" in 2002 after she was appointed to the bench at age 36.
She is cheerful but runs her court with exceptional efficiency.
When one attorney admitted that she was "faster than we are" as he tried to keep up with her blazing pace during a procedural matter, she simply retorted, "it'll be in the transcript," before ploughing ahead.
