Lordly Body Language

Conrad, Lord Black of Crossharbour, is endlessly fascinating. His careers as a journalist, entrepreneur, academic writer, biographer, political commentator and press baron all make equally good stories. I recommend his several books. As luck would have it, I met Lord Black during the dark days before his trial. We exchanged emails as I told him of writing up our encounter and my perspective on his trial for Lawyers Weekly. The lesson for politicians in committees and elsewhere is that non-verbal communication is as important, and can be as precise, as Oxford Dictionary definitions. One juror in the Conrad Black trial explained the guilty verdict very simplyhe was arrogant, I would say would be the main word I would come up with ... arrogant. The juror also said that she had no sympathy for the defendant. The explanation makes perfect sense. We make quick decisions on little information. The classic tale is that the flying public assumes that the airline with the cleanest lunch tray is also the safest. Clean trays have little to do with safety. But then again, what other criteria would a lay passenger use to judge the safety of an airline? We all use the information available to us. But this quote is curious on another level. Conrad Black said a grand total of absolutely nothing during his lengthy trial. So how could a juror come to the conclusion that Black is arrogant? This is explainable by reference to any good non-verbal dictionary. Regrettably, these dont exist, and one must rely on academic literature or psychology books to piece together the non-verbal clues a witness or defendant might give off to transmit arroganceor better yet, contrition, expertise or likeability. Even the legal journals and articles on witness preparation mainly speak of the need to exhibit positive body language without defining what that means. In fact, in the legal literature on witness preparation, theres a further dilemma about body language and demeanor. Child witnesses and the victims of sexual assault and rape can lower their credibility if they appear too comfortable and composed, even if theyre testifying years
LORDLY BODY LANGUAGE 29

after the incident. Such victims are supposed to be rattled, and juries expect them to show the signs of trauma. But that special case aside, how can someone like Conrad Black help his case just by walking in and out of the courtroom, sitting in a chair and saying nothing? The social-science literature is pretty clear about what is positive in non-verbal communication. First, in Western culture, one of the most commonly understood gestures is arms outstretched, elbows at 90 degrees, forearms rotated so that the inner arm is showing with the palms at an angle of 45 degrees. This is commonly understood to mean such things as: Im here ... Im with you ... Im open, have nothing to hide, am communicative and have no weapon. Another very commonly understood non-verbal signal is leaning forward a couple of degrees off the perpendicular. Imagine standing around a house party trying to strike up a conversation with someone standing ramrod straight, or worse, leaning back imperiously. Youd warm much more to a person who leaned forward a little but not so much as to invade your space. Stay with the house-party analogy and youll agree that about 50 to 75 percent of your impact as a person is non-verbal and about 50 to 75 percent of that is eye contact. If the person youre speaking with is looking over your shoulder for someone more interesting, you will probably not think well of that person. So how does this translate in court? How to walk in is a strategic decision. The accused should act purposeful and deliberate. This means walking directly to his chair without sweeping the room with his eyes. Arms should be at the side of the body with a gentle swing matching the gait, but they should not cross in front of the body. Any briefcase or papers should be put on the table purposefully without noise. A neutral or slightly positive facial expression is best. At the table, the accused can approximate positive body language by sitting forward in his chair, feet flat on the floor, back straight and tilted forward. Arms can rest gently on the desk, shoulder-width apart, with the palms rotated so as to be visible. Taking notes shows interest and respect, so long as it doesnt look as if youre making a transcript to check up on those speaking. Occasional looks at the judge, a witness, counsel who are speaking and the jury can show interest and respect for the process. But the looks must not be challenging, and the eyes should not dart around. The gaze should linger and be purposeful. Paradoxically, in person Conrad Black can be charming, even flattering.

30

LORDLY BODY LANGUAGE

When I last encountered him, I told the media baron how much I had enjoyed his autobiography, A Life in Progress. I told him how I would read it in bed at night and elbow my wife regularly and read passages to her aloud. He misunderstood my meaning and leaned toward me in genuine interest and asked something to this effect: And the verdict? I responded by enthusing that I had thought the book was first-rate. Lord Black seemed genuinely pleased. That egged me on. I began quoting liberally from the book, which Id read about eight years before. Many of the best lines were parenthetical. Hed interject something such as, For those who thought I was trying to whip up nostalgia for feudal times... and then make a more substantial point with no more reference to whom he was speaking about or feudal times. Hed drop in the term rented meatballs to describe members of the private security service he had briefly owned and spoke of having to wade through snow in his driveway while creeping past the sleeping security guard in the cara cutting comment all the more powerful because of his light touch. Conrad Black listened intently while I told him his own stories from his own book, often adding lines or finishing off narrative threads. But then I provided free editorial services. I reminded him that it was Phil Graham of The Washington Post, not his wife Katharine (who took over on Phils death), who defined journalism as a first rough draft of history. Trivia buffs will remember how John Mitchell (Nixons attorney general and CREEP director) referred to Ms. Graham and the dangers of getting too close to a wringer washing machine, but I digress. The second I challenged Lord Blacks citation, I could see his agile mind working overtime. His eyes glanced furtively around. Despite this step-up in activity, he maintained his rate of speech and vocal tone. He immediately riffed on the name Phil Graham, as a jazz musician would use a note to fly off on a musical trip. Who he was, his business dealings and other aspects of his career were the subjects. Yes, but it was he, not Katharine, who defined journalism as a first rough draft of history. I had a feeling that not many people have ever had the semantic or factual upper hand with Lord Black, so I thought I should emphasize my position. I knew that Lord Black, also a military buff, would appreciate my Blitzkrieg. The exchange ended with Lord Black stringing together disclaimers such as it may be ... Ill have to check that ... a chilling quote regardless... until our chat broke off. Later, I went home, photocopied the appropriate page from David Halberstams book The Powers That Be, which attributes the quote
LORDLY BODY LANGUAGE 31

to Phil, and wrote a nice supportive letter to Lord Black, appending the citation. A few days later, my assistant told me Id received a reply from Conrad Black and the whole letter is one long sentence that took up a whole page. It wasnt anything of the kind, but to a young person who was used to sentences such as What up? and Awesome, I guess it looked that way. Lord Black had written me a gracious note, saying he was in a phony war and had a plan to prevail. He made no reference to Graham, the quote or the Halberstam citation.

32

LORDLY BODY LANGUAGE