Blogs & Comment

Drabinsky Final Argument - 15: Eckstein's Nuremburg Defence

One of the explanations for with the myriad of documents prosecutors say clearly show that Drabinsky and Gottlieb knew about the fraud is the defence contention that Eckstein was manipulating those documents to make them seem more incriminating than they actually were and then stuffing them into his “Nuremburg File,” a refence to the Nuremburg defence employeed by Nazi’s who claimed they were merely following orders while committing war crimes.
Tony Fiorino, a Livent accountant, actually testified to a conversation with Eckstein where he told him the so-called Nuremburg defence didn’t work for the Nazis and it wouldn’t work for him.
Eckstein testifed that he instructed Grant Malcolm, another member of the accouting five, to show Messina schedules that showed how Livent had improperly “rolled forward” millions in advertising expenses from 1996 to 1997. He later admitted that the schedule may not have been indicated fraud. “Ecskstein’s testimony, to the effect that I put certain words in documents to connote ‘fraud’ so I could rely upon the documents later, is really his attempt in the witness box to impart a more sinister meaning into the words taht do not connote ‘fraud’ on their plain meaning.”
Fair enough. But the defence has so far not explained how that fits into the quarterly and year-end financial summaries that clearly showed that Livent was “reporting” millions in profits, while it was “actually” losing tens of millions of dollars.