Mike Duffy trial: What we have learned so far

The Mike Duffy trial had been allotted 41 days, but afternearly seven weeks of testimony in an Ottawa court, the Crown is still deep into building its case against the suspended senator.

In fact, when the case resumes in August after a two-month hiatus, the trial will hear from its first key witness Prime Minister Stephen Harper's former chief of staff Nigel Wright.

• Mike Duffy trial adjourns, returns Aug. 11 withNigelWright as 1st witness
• Mike Duffy trial hears accountant trace path ofNigelWright's $90K payment
• Duffy used line of credit to cover shortfalls, court hears
• Other senators pre-signed travel claim forms, Senate aide says

Duffy has pleaded not guilty to 31charges of fraud,breach of trust andbribery related to expenses he claimed asa senatorandlater repaidwith money from Wright.

During the first 35 days of the trial, the Crown has, unsurprisingly, focused on the bulk of the case, the charges of fraud.

Senate rules, such as they are

Some of that approach has made for some very dry testimony, as top Senate administrative officials took the witness box, at timesquestioned for daysover the various reports and manuals related to Senate rules and regulations.

But the evidence is key, because for the Crown to prove fraud (and by extension breach of trust) it must prove that Duffy clearly broke Senate rules by expensing claims that were not for "parliamentary business."

Those expenses include Duffy's per diem claims while living in Ottawa (the Crown alleges his primary residence is not P.E.I., as Duffy claims, making him ineligible for those claims), his travel expenses for flights around the country and the expenses he paid for some servicesthrough his former associate Gerald Donohue.

Some of those flights, the Crown alleges, have been forfunctions unrelated to parliamentary business, including partisanConservative party fundraisers, visits to family members, attendance atfunerals of friends, and, in one instance, a visitto a Peterborough, Ont., fair to purchase a dog.

Court also heard that on at least two occasions, while Duffy was being investigated by the RCMP, hesent out emailsexplaining his version of a tripthat had come under the scrutiny of the force.

The travel claim forms themselves have been a subject for the court, as former executive assistants to senators, including Duffy, testified they regularly had their bosses pre-sign the blank claimsto expeditethe administrative process.

Most intriguing aspect

Certainly the most intriguing aspect of the case so far has been the arrangement Duffy had with his former associate Gerald Donohue, who was awarded by Duffy nearly $65,000 worth of Senate contracts to perform editorial and consulting services for the senator.

The RCMP allegeDonohue did little or no work for those contracts. Instead, that pool of money, the Crown alleges, was used to pay for a number of expenses incurred by Duffy that the Senatewould not have covered.

Court has heard from a seriesof witnesses who received these cheques from Donohue's family-owned business, Maple Ridge Media, which later evolved into Ottawa ICF.The Crown has zeroed inon some of these expenses, including costs for a personal fitness trainer, makeup expenses, and claims for personal photos.

Although Donohue is a key figure, the trial has yet to hear fromhim. TheCrown has said that his health issueshave made it difficult to arrange times for his appearance.However, it's also possible that it may never call Donohue, satisfied that it has made its case without his testimony.

And while motive may not be needed to prove a case, the Crown seemed to suggest this week that Duffy'salleged criminal activity may have been prompted, in part, byhis financial situation.

Court heard from aforensic accountant who testified that over the period Duffy was senator, he was withdrawing more money from his bank account thandepositing, all the while covering the balance with his line of credit.

Duffy's lawyer fights back

It was a suggestion, like all the allegations heard so far against Duffy, rejected by Duffy's lawyer Donald Bayne.While Crown prosecutors Mark Holmes and Jason Neubauerhave splitthe duties of the case, Bayne has been the sole vocal advocate for Duffy, arguing, objecting andsometimes presenting multiple defences for particular charges.

BreakingSenate rules? Nonsense, Bayne suggested, as those rules werebroad, unclear and ambiguous.

Improper travel expenses? All related to Senate business, Bayne argued,which includes, according to those unclear Senate rules, "partisan activities." (Andif Duffy visited withfamily membersat the same time, that was totally appropriate, he said.)

For every contentionof wrongdoing, Baynefoughtback, delvingdeeper into the allegationto try toprove Duffy was indeed engaged in some sort of parliamentary related business.

As for Donohue, Bayne did not dispute the arrangement with Duffy, instead offering that while it was"administratively irregular," it wasnot criminal and that none of the recipients wereevertold to keep the arrangement quiet.

Bayne seems itching to go on the offensive andpresent his side of the case. And with virtually no chance proceedingswill wrap up in August, he may still be defending his clientwell intoNovember, the slated time for the fourth phase of the trial.