Who is paying Mike Duffy’s lawyer?

Last week, columnist Christie Blatchford, who is covering the Mike Duffy trial for the National Post, asked this question. I thought: what an excellent question. Here is a guy, who is on trial for padding his expenses to the tune of $90K and who could not pay it back himself when asked to. How can he afford to hire Donald Bayne? Bayne is reportedly one of the top criminal lawyers in Canada. Can you imagine what his hourly rate is? Considering the length of the trial, and the amount of time Bayne has evidently invested in analyzing every e-mail, his bill must be exorbitant by now. Blatchford reports that Duffy has taken a $500K mortgage out on his house, but Bayne’s legal fees must be way higher than this by now.

Bayne could, of course, be defending Senator Duffy pro bono, but Duffy doesn’t strike me as the kind of defendant that would tug at the heartstrings of a criminal defense lawyer. He is not an underprivileged minority ‘youth’ who can’t afford to mount a defence, somebody whose public defence would go a long way in raising the moral stature of his legal defender in the salons of Yorkville. The case against Duffy also does not involve any higher legal or moral principle. It’s just about a grubby politician accused of stuffing his own pockets – and a conservative one at that!

So if it is unlikely that Duffy can afford to pay Bayne himself, and if it is unlikely that Duffy could inspire Bayne to defend him for free, and if it is also unlikely that Duffy could fool an old fox like Bayne into thinking he can pay Bayne’s bills when he really can’t, the only remaining likely option is that somebody else is paying them. Who could that be?

One clue comes from the vigorous multi-day cross-examination of Nigel Wright. Donald Bayne showed great interest in determining whether Prime Minister Stephen Harper knew about the $90K cheque that Wright wrote to Duffy to cover his disputed expenses. At one point in the cross-examination, the prosecutor objected that this line of questioning has nothing to do with the matter at hand. The judge dismissed this objection but I think the prosecutor was right. What has Nigel Wright’s cheque got to do with the ostensible purpose for the trial, to determine whether Mike Duffy committed fraud over his expenses? (As an aside, I think Duffy will be found innocent. His expense claims were approved, and the Senate rules about primary residence were, at the time, vague.)

One would think that if Duffy were as short of cash as he says he is, and if Bayne’s billable hours are as high as they likely are, Duffy would have instructed Bayne to keep his costs to a minimum by running a no-frills defence. But Bayne acts as if it had money to burn, as if he were part of the O J Simpson Defence Establishment.

The obvious guess is that the Liberal Party is paying them. Reinforcing this suspicion is the fact that Bayne seemed to deliberately slow-walk the trial this spring, in order to force it into recess. Christie Blatchford reported that the trial of former Liberal Senator Mar Harb was originally set for Aug 10. Because Harb and Duffy are accused of fundamentally the same thing, and because they share the same prosecutor, this would have meant that if everything went according to schedule, Harb’s trial would be happening right now instead of Duffy’s. Instead, Harb got his trial date postponed, so that – conveniently enough - the politically interesting parts of Duffy’s trial happened during the Federal Election.

Personally, I doubt the Liberal Party is paying Duffy’s defence directly. This would be too reckless and risky a move for even an airhead like Justin Trudeau. Personally, I suspect Bayne is being paid by some Liberal donor who would have liked to donate much more to the Liberal Cause than campaign finance laws permit. Paying Bayne’s salary allows him to contribute to the cause in a way that Elections Canada cannot scrutinize.

If the mainstream media really were a neutral reporter of the news, they would be asking who is paying Bayne as vigorously as they are now asking Stephen Harper whether he knew about Wright’s $90K cheque.

 

Comments

[Fran Auger]

If Duffy is paying for his own defense that would be one for the history books. Ever wonder what his expense accounts at CTV show? The amoral Duffy is a perfect foil for the corrupt and shameless. Sleaze is not a strong enough term to describe this sorry grifter.

[Bubba rown]

This question of who is paying is I think one of the most important of this election.
As well as the timing of the show trial about nothing.
Why are not the Liberal Media asking Angry Tom about the 3.5 million for offices?
Is this payback for refusal to let the consortium (CBC CTV)run the debates, just askin'

[Don Morris]

Yes,it's interesting to speculate on which Liberal billionaire could be paying Bayne's bill, could be any one or a group of a dozen or so of the wealthiest people in Canada,all members of the same club,as Bayne probably is as well.

Unfortunately, we don't truly have a News media any more, no passionate,dedicated journalists committed to following a story to find the truth, just a bunch of propagandists who can't see they are a big part of the problem with political corruption in Canada, not even remotely part of the solution.

[oldwhiteguy]

as duffy was in the senate, i will venture a guess that the taxpayers are picking up the tab.

[WiseGuy]

Might be a good idea for somebody to start asking this question before live cameras.
Better yet, just state that wealthy Liberals are paying Bayne in order to influence an election outcome. Whether it is true or not, the media would have to deal with the allegation. It could go a long way to deflate history's least scandalous "political scandal".

[johnplayerson]

It is very likely Duffy's Lawyer figures he will get him off. IF so he knows the Government of Canada will have to pay Duffy's legal bills after the trial, through Civil suit, and that he also has a big commission cheque coming from such settlement. Duffy in the meantime can give him enough cash through his 500,000 mortage.