Seems like the crime of our time is "lying under oath." Bill did it and got impeached, not because he allowed himself to be Monica-ized, but because he lied about it. Martha did it and got convicted. Had Martha said, at the time, I'm sorry but I simply do not remember, they could not have convicted her of obstructing justice. Now, attorneys will need to start advising their clients how say, "I'm sorry, I simply do not remember," or the old standby, "I refuse to answer the question on the grounds ....." Was Bill guilty? Yep. Was Martha guilty? Yep. I know that I have had "tips" on the market. Tips that I acted upon. Tips where I made really good money. Bought a f-car with the profits. I don't know what the answer is. Is the world a safer place because Bill and Martha were both convicted? Probably not. Our we, theoretically, safer? Sure.
I never did enjoy Martha. My opinion is more like horsefly's. IN the big scheme of things she was just stupid. I think what she did happens every day. I agree on O.J. and worldcom and tyco and adelphia.
Selective "Fat-Cat hating, eh? So this lawbreaker can cook and knows cale from cabbage. Greed wasn't good for her, was it? DL
Does it happen evey day? Without a doubt. I think the broader point is that her conviction will hopefully be a heads up to others and keep them from breaking the rules.
As I said before: "Not because she didn't deserve that verdict, but because she did the things that she did. " She is indeed a fat cat, and she deserved the verdict that she got. But like all fat cats, she will get a severe wrist slapping, maybe do 6 months in a federal prison and some community service. Even if her empire crumbles because of the bad publicity, her gigantic personal bank account will survive and she will still live 1000 times better than the honest citizen who has never considered illegal insider trading.
I have a friend who was mid-level at Disney, he said they already make plenty of money on porno (I couldn't get him to elaborate further with the wives at the table though). I think that this kind of insider trading happens so often, that Martha MUST have had some serious enemies on the SEC's side. Someone wanted to mess her up bad.
Several comments: 1. The Federal sentencing rules were changed several years ago. I'd be very surprised if Martha walks on this. For example, the minimum, the mimumum, sentence for money laundering is 10 years. And, BTW, the Fed good time is one month per year. You get a 10 year bounce, you're gonna do 9. 2. Martha's crime is chump change compared to the real thieves on Wall Street. Trust me on this one, she got set up because she is an arrogant woman. Don't get me wrong. She lied, and she will now have to pay the price. But there are many, many, many other men who have done far worse than her who are laughing their azz off tonight. 3. The real story is the bio-technology behind all of this. The days of Jonas Salk are gone. There is so much on the table when it come to new bio technology that it is insane. If you are lucky, you can turn $10 Million of hard costs into $1 Billion of real money. The odds are against you, but if you are the one who can pull the sword out of the stone, you become the Master and Commander of all that you see. One quick example... some people never learn (clue up that stupid song about the flowers going). Despite losing almost mo money than the law allows on past investments, I'm fixin to invest some more money into a stem cell research venture. I know, I know, I might as well go to Lost Wages and have a good time, but... but... if this thing hits. Enzos on the house! Seriously, though, stem cell technology has the potential to change everything. Instead of a heart transplant, you just inject some cell into a bad heart and it regenerates itself. This changes everything. My point is that the next wave of bio technology is so far reaching that it boogles the mind. The irony of the Martha Stewart case is that apparently the FDA ulitmately gave its blessing to the underlying drug. Imagine that. Does this it make sense for our culture to rely upon a bunch of scientific cowboys to create the next big thing? I don't know. But, this is the way that it is... (With apologies to Walter) Dr "Bleeding Edge" Tax
She took a hard line and got nailed. If she had of copped to it I'm not sure that things would be different. She got made an example of. If your high profile you have to be extra careful. She thought that she was above it all and would skate because she's "Martha." A hard lesson.
The prosecuting atty wants to make an example for all the corporate scammers out their, she may get nailed hard from the judge, this issue is a hot potatoe and the judge will look bad if he's easy on her.
Class envy my pale white ass. If it was someone trying to scratch by investing some scraps, its no less illegal, but we understand they are trying to make ends meet. Having a net worth of MILLIONS and trying to save 50k or 100k when it won't even hurt them is ****ing greedy, pure and simple. Let me know if you need a hand down from your high horse.
And when you help him down, hold him. I will get a brick.... Excuse me, I almost lost it for a moment. Stealing is somthing I can't stand. And when she says "I didn't know", I want her head cracked open as a lesson for everyone else. That piece of sh*t should get 20 years like the rest of "us" would. I'm going to go kick a homeless family untill I feel better. Does she ever want to cross me??? F*CK NO! She thinks this trial is a waste of her time? If she tried this stunt against me, I would bury her.
My old man had a chance to play golf twice by filling in for someone and both times he discovered it was OJ and his buddies, my old man refused to fill in after talking with him.
I was speaking to the Dr. there who is doing stem cell research for patients with Macular Degeneration. Fascinating stuff. DL
Wow, talk about greed. To put it in perspective, her insider trade saved her approx. $50,000 when her net worth was estimated at around $500MM. That's the equivalent of someone with a $100,000 net worth losing $10 (TEN DOLLARS!).
John/FutureOwner, Obviously from your avatar you have more experience with the stock market than I do, although with the Disney analogy, I was merely pointing out what people would likely do with a substantial investment, whether it was legal or not. From the posts preceding mine I got the general feeling that people were glad she was convicted because they disliked her public persona, not because of the crimes for which she was convicted. Dont' get me wrong, she doesn't appear to be a fun person to be around every day, but when I saw the conviction yesterday afternoon I thought to myself: "if they want to get you, they will eventually...on something". It seems that society would not be served by putting her in jail, the expense of the prosecution and incarceration will be far greater than the financial damage she inflicted on some poor sap the day she sold. A monster fine ($20M?) would do more to deter fat cats than jail time, or at least finance prosecutions rather than taxpayers. Thousands if not millions of stock trades have been initiated on inside information since her indictment two years ago. It is still interesting that she was convicted of obstructing justice, conspiracy, and false statements about insider trading, but was not convicted of actual insider trading. It seems that the argument could be made that how could she conspire, obstruct justice, etc, about a crime that she was "innocent" of? Notice I did not say "not guilty" as no verdict regarding securities fraud was given. Remember, innocent until proven guilty right? I'm neither a lawyer or stockbroker, so I may be off base, but it seems that she was a hard-nosed businesswoman whose enemies finally took down, IMO.
I hope my avatar doesn't mislead you, as I am currently senior finance major, not a seasoned market player. Anyways, I too was surprised that she will be facing jailtime. You stated: "It seems that society would not be served by putting her in jail, the expense of the prosecution and incarceration will be far greater than the financial damage she inflicted on some poor sap the day she sold. A monster fine ($20M?) would do more to deter fat cats than jail time, or at least finance prosecutions rather than taxpayers. Thousands if not millions of stock trades have been initiated on inside information since her indictment two years ago." I respectufully disagree. I think the fact that she is going to be incarcerated sends chills down corporate America's spine. Especially to the people who continually cheat the system. Like I said before, these crimes cost us BILLIONS of dollars per year. The monetary value of putting Marth on trial(coupled with her subsequent conviction) is far less than the money that can be saved by scaring the stuff out of scammers. I do not see anything unreasonable about that assumption. Interestingly, this discussion does not stop there. So was Martha pegged because she stepped on the wrong toes? Quite possible. Even likely. I do think that there are countless others who should get the same treatment. But just because she was one of the first high profile convictions does not change the fact that these practices are wrong, and that offenders should still be punished. That is why I said "no sympathy here." Now don't flame me for this, but let's say that Bush had NO REASON other than a personal vendetta to capture Saddam(remember, this is hypothetical ). Once Saddam was captured is it not true that the Iraqi people will most likely be better off? Despite the intentions of Bush? I think so. So Martha got pegged, for what reason is anyone's guess. But it is about time people in high society be just as accountable for their actions as the common shoplifter. But what do I know? BTW, when is sentencing?
I don't know guys... Tally up all the illegal things you have ever done in your life. Do you still want to throw the book at any and all lawbreakers? Me neither (heck, I may have exceeded the posted speed limit on the way here. Maybe. I do not recall, Senator.) I keep wondering why they're going after her so hard, she must have pissed somebody off who's far worse than her. Honestly, the insider trading laws make only about as much sense as they weigh. On the one hand, I understand the need for something like them, however it's like legistating against looking to the left. A bit of a pisser.
