Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Martha Stewart Gets Away With It!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Martha Stewart Gets Away With It!

    The judge just dismissed the securities fraud charge, the most dangerous charge for her (10 years in jail).


    "Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a ugly brawl."
    --Frederick II, King of Prussia

  • #2
    Rich for the most part means innocent.


    Goblin
    Mega Campaign Screaming Eagles and Das Reich Design Team Member
    DAS REICH CAMPAIGN, and THE SPWaW ICON GUIDE AVAILABLE AT: The SP:WaW Depot
    In difficult ground, press on. In encircled ground, devise strategems. In death ground, fight.

    Comment


    • #3
      Darn I was looking forward to see how she decorated her jail cell

      Thanks for looking!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by MonsterZero
        The judge just dismissed the securities fraud charge, the most dangerous charge for her (10 years in jail).

        Well if she didn't commit fraud she didn't do anything wrong in my opinion.
        I mean how the hell are investors supposed to not act on the information they get? If one of the Enron upper-ups told some of the retirement fund investors that the whole thing was built on fraud I wouldn't blame the investors for selling. It's the insiders themselves that have to be gone after with a vengeance. If someone gave me some inside info that my family's money and future were in jeapordy I would use that info in a flash! In Martha's case it's the broker and the co. president that should suffer. Not to mention that little snitch that actually told her and then told on her.
        ...a man that can stand up for a principle and sit down on his own stool.
        -the Firesign Theatre

        Comment


        • #5
          Hello,

          The problem is that it's not considered a fair play. Not many of us have inside knowledge of what made the stock markets tick tock.

          If you're going to tell a friend that his or her stocks are about to plummet, you might as well tell everybody who owned those stocks, otherwise it's not a fair play.

          I recall somewhere that during the Great Depression, several wealthy people had inside knowledge that the stock markets were going to crash, they immediately pulled out, leaving the others in dust. When the stock market crashed, they went in and bought the stocks priced at pennies and a few dollars, in the process, they became wealthier. To many people, this was considered unfair and repungant.

          No one likes to see their life savings destroyed while the others who had inside knowledge got away with it and walked all way to the bank laughing hard.

          Having said, that I think what Stewart did was wrong, and unfortunately, the money does speak loudly in the American court system. After all, since America is capitalistic, naturally, that does tend to carry over to the justice system.

          Look on the bright side, forever, Stewart's name will be smeared and given a black mark. Let's hope Americans can remember that way...

          Dan
          Major James Holden, Georgia Badgers Militia of Rainbow Regiment, American Civil War

          "Aim small, miss small."

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Tiberius
            Well if she didn't commit fraud she didn't do anything wrong in my opinion.
            I mean how the hell are investors supposed to not act on the information they get? If one of the Enron upper-ups told some of the retirement fund investors that the whole thing was built on fraud I wouldn't blame the investors for selling. It's the insiders themselves that have to be gone after with a vengeance. If someone gave me some inside info that my family's money and future were in jeapordy I would use that info in a flash! In Martha's case it's the broker and the co. president that should suffer. Not to mention that little snitch that actually told her and then told on her.
            What about the charges of lying to investigators?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Prester John
              What about the charges of lying to investigators?
              Too bad, Stewart can't be charged with prejury, that carries a 10-years jail sentence and a fine of up to $10,000.

              I wonder what the the charge of obstruction of the justice carries....

              Dan
              Major James Holden, Georgia Badgers Militia of Rainbow Regiment, American Civil War

              "Aim small, miss small."

              Comment


              • #8
                If Stewart is guilty of insider trading (regardless of what the court finds) I'd have a little more sympathy for her if the amount of money in her Imclone stocks ($228k) wasn't an absolutely trivial amount for her.

                If that were her life savings - I would understand why she did it (without actually endorsing what she did).

                But that amount of money is nothing to her... it was pure greed and if she's guilty, I hope she gets the maximum sentence.
                "Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

                – Associate Justice Louis D. Brandeis, Olmstead vs. United States.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Prester John
                  What about the charges of lying to investigators?
                  If that's separate from the fraud she should fry for it.
                  ...a man that can stand up for a principle and sit down on his own stool.
                  -the Firesign Theatre

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Cheetah772
                    Hello,

                    The problem is that it's not considered a fair play. Not many of us have inside knowledge of what made the stock markets tick tock.

                    If you're going to tell a friend that his or her stocks are about to plummet, you might as well tell everybody who owned those stocks, otherwise it's not a fair play.

                    I recall somewhere that during the Great Depression, several wealthy people had inside knowledge that the stock markets were going to crash, they immediately pulled out, leaving the others in dust. When the stock market crashed, they went in and bought the stocks priced at pennies and a few dollars, in the process, they became wealthier. To many people, this was considered unfair and repungant.

                    No one likes to see their life savings destroyed while the others who had inside knowledge got away with it and walked all way to the bank laughing hard.

                    Having said, that I think what Stewart did was wrong, and unfortunately, the money does speak loudly in the American court system. After all, since America is capitalistic, naturally, that does tend to carry over to the justice system.

                    Look on the bright side, forever, Stewart's name will be smeared and given a black mark. Let's hope Americans can remember that way...

                    Dan
                    YOu guys are absolutely right that insider trading sucks and should be illegal.
                    What I am saying is that it is the givers of information that should be punished and gone after. What if my family's retirement is tied up in some stock that I accidentally overhear is going to plunge? How can I not act on that. Or even someone calls me up and tells me. It is the leaker who should be punished.
                    ...a man that can stand up for a principle and sit down on his own stool.
                    -the Firesign Theatre

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Tiberius
                      YOu guys are absolutely right that insider trading sucks and should be illegal.
                      What I am saying is that it is the givers of information that should be punished and gone after. What if my family's retirement is tied up in some stock that I accidentally overhear is going to plunge? How can I not act on that. Or even someone calls me up and tells me. It is the leaker who should be punished.
                      Having the information is not sufficient. More than a couple of people can have information about a companies activities and nothing will happen. It is acting on the information for your own advantage which is the problem.

                      By your anecdote it will be the fault of the people you were eaves-dropping on at the next table. You would make a criminal of them for your own spying? What if they were simply discussing rumours but you thought it was genuine and acted on it? It is action which counts.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by MonsterZero
                        The judge just dismissed the securities fraud charge, the most dangerous charge for her (10 years in jail).

                        That one was going to be hard to prove anyway.

                        Comment

                        Latest Topics

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X