Another potential motive Drabinsky had for participating in accounting irregularities was an attempt to escape a “crushing personal debt,” the crown alleges. That motive comes from that letter Drabinsky wrote to Karen Poppell, his “mistress,” uh, I mean friend, or whatever.
Defence lawyers dismiss the letter as irrelevant and urge the judge to completely disregard it. “The letter is not dated. There is no evidence whatsoever that this document was ever sent,” Greenspan argues. “The letter is irrelevant and unstrustworthy.”
But there is one more motive in the letter that neither the Crown, nore the defence discuss. In the letter Drabinsky tells Poppell that he should have told her that he was not going to be able to meet a March 31st “deadline” set – apparently for Drabinsky to leave his wife. “I never wanted to admit weakness to you or dilute your confidence in me,” Drabinsky writes.
Having to admit that Livent was losing money – and lots of it – would have “diluted the confidence” of investors, creditors, critics and others in the theatre and financial communities. Having to admit that the Drabinsky vision of a successful and glamourous theatre company that raked in enough money to pay for private jets, gala parties and the best live theatre productions ever performed would have been humiliating, wouldn’t it?