Martha Stewart - What do you think?

[luvmetender]

How do you feel about the way Martha Stewart is being treated by the legal system and the media? I heard yesterday that if she is convicted, she could face up to 30 years in jail.

What is the point? Why are tax dollars being spent to prosecute this woman? Do you really think she knowingly broke the law just to save a measley $45,000?

If it wasn't a celebrity, this wouldn't even be happening.

[pandybat]

Originally Posted by luvmetender

If it wasn't a celebrity, this wouldn't even be happening.

Why do people say this every time a celebrity gets caught for breaking the law??
Of course she should be punished for it. The only reason we don't hear about other people being punished for the same thing is because they are NOT celebrities.
And yes, I believe she would done it to save herself the $45,000. The thing I wonder about is if she knew it was illegal to do what she did. My guess is she probably did but didn't think she would get caught.

[luvmetender]

Originally Posted by pandybat

Why do people say this every time a celebrity gets caught for breaking the law??
Of course she should be punished for it. The only reason we don't hear about other people being punished for the same thing is because they are NOT celebrities.
And yes, I believe she would done it to save herself the $45,000. The thing I wonder about is if she knew it was illegal to do what she did. My guess is she probably did but didn't think she would get caught.

And do you think 30 years is appropriate? Rapists don't even get that much time!

[pandybat]

Originally Posted by luvmetender

And do you think 30 years is appropriate? Rapists don't even get that much time!

I would be very surprised if Martha does any time for this. But that doesn't mean she shouldn't be charged with the crime if she did it. She will mostly likely be set up with a fine and some community service.

[bwsmom]

I really don't know what to make of the whole thing. On the one hand, she does seem pretty savvy and smart, so one would think she knew what she was doing. On the other hand, maybe she did have the agreement, as she claims, to have the stock dumped if it went below a certain dollar amount. The only thing that really makes me feel she's guilty is the notion that if the agreement had been made, it would be in writing somewhere, and she'd be able to haul out the paperwork and say "See, it says right here...". That would've put an end to things really quickly.

Luv, I think you have a very good point... not only do rapists not get 30 years, child molesters, drunk drivers (even those who kill while driving drunk) and "manslaughterers" (is there such a word ) don't get that much time either! There is an incredible imbalance in the justice system in that respect!

When all is said and done, I think pandy's right...she'll probably just have to fork over some dough ($45,000 perhaps?) and serve up some meals at the Salvation Army or some such thing.... hey, at least the table settings will be nice!

[freesurfer]

LOL @ bwsmom!!!

That's the problem with our justice system. It's so wacked! I agree that the 30 years is crazy! And that your rapists and murderers get very little. Maybe the jails/prisons need redoing as well and they want Martha to do it!!

[JillyB71]

30 years does seem like a lot especially when you consider Janklow faced up to 10 years for manslaughter. But we all know what happened to him...100 days in jail with time out each day to do community service.

Which is the biggest injustice - Martha serving 30 years for insider trading or Janklow serving 100 days for killing someone?

And the celebrity sword swings both ways here. Would Janklow have gotten only 100 days if he hadn't been a public official? Probably not. Will Martha walk away with a slap and a fine? Probably so. Would any ordinary person get away with this? I doubt it, at least not to the extent of a celebrity.

[doglover22]

I really have no idea if she sold her stock becuase of an insider tip or not, but if she did, she had to know that it was illegal. She used to be a stockbroker so she knows the law.

As far as her getting up to 30 years, I think that is stupid. Rapists deserve 30 years (actualy, I think they deserve more but that is another discussion), not stock sellers.

[monkee]

Let's face it, Martha isn't going to spend 30 years in jail for this! In fact, you'd probably be hard-pressed to find anyone, celebrity or not, who got 30 years for exactly the same thing.

As for why our tax dollars are being spent on this, well I guess because that's what the courts are for. Yes, we don't "know" that she did anything wrong, she's innocent until proven guilty. Just like we don't "know" that Michael Jackson or Janklow or anyone charged with a crime did anything wrong until a trial takes place and evidence is presented. If we're going to imply that we shouldn't be messing around with this, then what's the point of going after anyone? I understand that we're talking about different crimes, but the basic premise is the same. If she did what she's accused of, and if she lied about it later to investigators, then she deserves to prosecuted. She may have only made a "measly" $45,000, but she did it because she had an inside line. Other people who owned the stock didn't have the information and lot of them probably lost a lot of money. Is that fair?

[freesurfer]

30 years does seem like a lot especially when you consider Janklow faced up to 10 years for manslaughter. But we all know what happened to him...100 days in jail with time out each day to do community service


I was thinking this same thing!!

[crazytimes]

I just think that she has the POSSIBILITY to get 30 years in jail, while many other "hard" criminals don't even FACE that possibilty. That's what I think is messed up.

If she did it make her pay a fine, she's got the money. Make her pay like a few million to some charity or something.

I think jails should be reserved for people who are a THREAT to society. Martha Stewart is not a threat.

[Taxman]

I've got to respectfully disagree. Financial crimes are just as damaging to the fabric of society as violent crime, maybe even more so. Think of Enron, Arthur Anderson, ect. Also realize that what she is accused of is illegal because it was insider trading that (in part) caused the Great Crash that ushered in the Great Depression. A slap on the wrist is no where near enough for her if she is found guilty.

[eldo]

Originally Posted by luvmetender

Do you really think she knowingly broke the law just to save a measley $45,000?

Yes, it's entirely possible. People cheat on their taxes, steal, etc. no matter what their income level (Winona Ryder, a recent example).

Their morals and ethics dictate their behavior, not their bank account.

As for how much, if any, jail time she should do, I leave that up to the judicial system to decide.

[crazytimes]

If those crimes are so damaging, then why aren't the Enron guys behind bars for life? That's what I'd like to know. They caused thousands of families to lose money.

The thing is she's NOT on trial for insider trading. She's on trial for supposedly lying to investigators and investors. I hardly think lying should get you 30 years in jail.

I don't get it. They claim that she tried to up her stock by saying she was innocent. WELL WHAT THE **** WAS SHE SUPPOSED TO DO? Say "I'm guilty," I mean come on! I think that charge is ridiculous and unfair. Why should someone be forced to sit back while others make accusations about them?

The other charge, lying to investigators, is fine, but I hardly think it should get you 30 years in prison!

[pandybat]

Update:

Martha's Break From Court
January 29, 2004


MARTHA STEWART's trial is temporarily on hold. A federal judge made the decision Thursday when Martha's attorneys accused prosecutors of withholding information about their star witness' story. There is confusion whether the witness, former Merrill Lynch employee DOUGLAS FANEUIL, was having difficulty remembering who allegedly told him to give Martha the ImClone stock tip, or if Faneuil's 80-year-old former lawyer was unclear about what his client told him. Prosecutors turned over the information on Wednesday night prompting a protest from the defense. Faneuil had been scheduled to testify Thursday with what is likely the most damaging evidence to Martha. Her trial will resume on Monday.