Investigators say Conrad Black had his hand in the cookie jar. The issue in his fraud trial, now underway in Chicago, is not whether or not his hand was in the jar, but whether or not he had permission.

The cookie jar in this case is what's called "non-compete" payments. And the defendant, Black, appears to be saying that his lawyers' advice concerning the way he received those payments indicated that it was perfectly legal.

Before I launch into this diatribe, I need to come clean that I'm far from impartial when it comes to Conrad Black, as he is my former employer. And, as will be obvious, there is no love lost between so-called Lord Black of Doublecross Harbour (or something like that) and me. He was by far the worst employer I have ever had, and I have had some crappy bosses in my 26 years of working life.

But I won't go into details here on why he made such a terrible boss. Let it suffice that I was working in the newsroom of the Calgary Herald when it went on strike in 1999, and I walked out of there with my head high, despite my own and many striking colleagues' premonitions that we'd be unwelcome back.

Recently, Elizabeth DeMerchant, who served as Black's counsel at the time of his alleged fraud, testified that her wits were on another planet when she gave her advice to Black and Co. concerning the non-compete payments: "Brain connection was not functioning," she told the court. And guess what? She's no longer working as a lawyer!

Judging by Black's current lawyers' opening statements, the strategy at the trial is to portray Black as a good guy who got bad advice and had some corrupt help from people including his former partner David Radler.

DeMerchant's testimony seems to fit well with that overall strategy.

My qualm with Black today is in his reaction to all of the revelations of alleged impropriety. His might be a sound defence (ignorance), but his legal tactics hardly match his actions.

When a well-meaning man finds out that he has done something questionable, notwithstanding his lawyers' advice, he immediately apologizes, makes reparations and accepts any and all censure.

But, in my opinion, an ill-intentioned person might react similarly to Black.

He might seek to proclaim his "innocence," point to all the other guilty people, unwillingly accept censure and make no recompense or meaningful apologies. When a judge told Black to stay away from his office and its files, he was videotaped going there anyway and removing boxes.

Black's former colleague Radler pleaded guilty and paid back his ill-gotten gains. The contrast with Black is enlightening.

That's not to say that investors in Hollinger International should not have known Black's true colour many years ago. His bombast and biting remarks have hurt shareholders before. In March 2000, he publicly called some of his most exceptional journalists (I'm not including myself in that notable company) "gangrenous limbs" while they were striking (or locked out from) the Calgary Herald.

It appeared to me to be more important to Black's ego to win the battle against troublesome journalists than to make a deal that made good business sense and protected the newspaper and, therefore, the company.

That only a very small number of them are still working for the Herald might be ironic enough. Still, it appears that the Herald is no better off without the following kind of personnel (I could name many more) who took his words to heart and severed their ties to him:

* Ken McGoogan: Now an award-winning, best-selling author, he's been a university professor even while producing two well-reviewed history books since the strike.

* Brian Brennan: Producing a steady stream of biographical books on people in Alberta history, he has won many accolades including a freelance-writer award.

He regularly works as a self-employed musician too.

* Eric Duhatschek: The Globe and Mail sports department does not appear to have a problem with his value to their organization; he is part of the Canadian Hockey Hall of Fame in recognition of his hockey coverage.

* Larry MacDougal: Does anyone remember that famous picture of the Mounties crying with their hats on their laps during the funeral for the four officers killed in Mayerthorpe, Alta.? The photo won MacDougal a Canadian Newspaper Association Award. I asked him how he captured that picture, and he said he tries to look the opposite way that most other people or photographers are facing in order to get that great shot. When Tom Jackson was singing Amazing Grace, everyone was looking at Jackson. But not MacDougal; he was looking at the people looking at Jackson. That's genius. And that's the kind of talent Black lopped off just before he sold the franchise.

I think Hollinger's shareholders might have received more value for their investment if Black had not tossed such talent away from his company before he sold it off. Such people have no trouble finding success anywhere they choose, including with competitors of the newspapers he sold.

But the legacy Black left was one of putting his own interests ahead of his readers and shareholders.

It is little wonder to me that he is facing the trials he is today, and it should serve as a warning sign to anyone who plans to invest in companies run by vainglorious, narcissistic executives.

(Ian van de Burgt can be reached at ian@businessedge.ca)