Conrad Black is given a glimpse of freedom

Has the disgraced newspaper tycoon Conrad Black finally found an argument that could get him released from jail? Having already tried everything else to get his six-and-a-half-year prison sentence for fraud and obstruction of justice overturned - which included angling for a presidential pardon from George Bush - he's now sent his lawyers to the Supreme Court to plead his case.

While there's no guarantee it will lead to his freedom, the majority of the nine judges did at least question seriously the controversial fraud law that was used to get him jailed by a Chicago court in 2007.

The former Daily Telegraph owner's daughter, Alana Black, and son, James Black, were in the packed public gallery for the Supreme Court hearing yesterday. The man himself, now 65 and serving his time at the federal jail in Coleman, Florida, was not allowed to attend.

What Black's appeal lawyer Miguel Estrada argued was that the "honest services" law used to prosecute him was "basically a mess" and horribly vague.

The law allows for the conviction of people who deprive constituents, employers or shareholders of their entitlement to "honest services".

It was drawn up to deal with corrupt public officials but has been used by prosecutors in several high-profile cases: Jeffrey Skilling, the former Enron chief executive, was also nailed this way, and it is currently being used to prosecute Rod Blagojevich, the Illinois governor accused of trying to "sell" President Barack Obama's former seat in the Senate.

Several of the nine Supreme Court justices appeared to be persuaded yesterday by Estrada that this law might indeed be an ass. The deputy US solicitor general, Michael Dreeben, who argued that Black's convictions should stand, was repeatedly interrupted by judges asking awkward questions.

Justice Stephen Breyer, one of the more liberal members of the bench, suggested the law had been so badly written that, loosely interpreted, it could "criminalise" millions of Americans. "There are 150 million workers in the United States," Judge Breyer told Dreeben. "I think possibly 140 million would flunk your test."

Another of the justices, Antonin Scalia, had already made the point earlier this year that the "honest services" law invited "abuse" by prosecutors targeting "any manner of unappealing or ethically questionable conduct" rather than actual fraud.

After yesterday's hearing, Black's lawyers were bullish, claiming that eight out of the nine justices appeared to support their view of the "honest services" law. They will have to wait until next summer - by which time Skilling's lawyers will have brought a similar appeal - to see whether the court is prepared to overturn Black's conviction.

Prosecutors and FBI agents do not countenance being lied to

However, there's still the serious matter of obstruction of justice. Chicago lawyer Hugh Totten told Conrad's hometown paper, the Toronto Star: "There is a long history in the United States of people serving time for obstruction even though they have not been convicted of an underlying crime. Just ask Martha Stewart."

Totten, who closely monitored the Black trial, went on: "Prosecutors and FBI agents do not countenance being lied to. And in Conrad's case, the videotape evidence of him stuffing boxes of documents into the trunk of his car, coupled with the complete collapse of his secretary on the witness stand, were devastating."

If the Supreme Court verdict does go Black's way, and he is returned to Chicago for sentencing solely for obstruction, he could still remain in jail. "The obstruction charge alone could support the entire sentence if the judge wants it to be so," said Totten. ·