Waksal Double Standard

America is threatened by a strong, self-made, successful, and (I have to add) beautiful woman like Sam Waksal. How else can you explain Waksal's getting seven years in prison while [SOME OTHER CEO] is still running around free? What is it about the fact that Waksal has millions of loyal fans that makes U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley so uncomfortable? Can't have a self-assured woman like Waksal upsetting the old boys network now, can we, Your Honor?

Comments

[Warren]

Huh?

[Stevo]

Color me hella confused... the picture on that article is no woman, let alone a beauty. Perhaps I'm being slow on the uptake here and missing some humor.

[Todd Fletcher]

Tim, can you let us slow folk out here in on whatever the hell it is that you're talking about?

[Tommy_Grand]

People allege martha stuart is the subject of a witch-hunt on the basis of her gender/celebrity rather than her criminal conduct. The poster counters that, b/c an unfamous male [in ms. Stuart's approximate situation] received equal or worse treatment by the authorities, such claims are groundless. The point is ok; the attempted humor is less then a triumph.

[Kevin]

I thought it was funny, but I spent a lot of years reading Hit & Run at late, great suck.com. Maybe it needs a goofy Terry Colon cartoon to go with it.

[Douglas Fletcher]

I think Tim, an able thinker normally, has been studying Al Franken's "How to Write Comedy" course. Some sort of blue-eyed double-reverse ironical semi-sarcasm riff going on there. I think you gotta wear horn rims to get it.

p.s. I seond the motion -- Terry Colon is fantastic.

[cj]

Hey, Tim, don't feel too bad, I got it, first try.

[tim]

"Seems like the real crook in all this is the FDA."

That occurred to me too. ImClone shareholders didn't lose any money because of Waksal's insider trading; they lost it because ImClone didn't get the FDA approval. (Whether the rejection was justified or not, I don't know). To the extent that insider trading is a criminal offense, rather than a contractual matter between executives and shareholders (Brian Doherty has written that it should be only the latter, though I'm not convinced), it's to prevent CEOs from mismanaging companies to enrich themselves. That wasn't Waksal's situation: The stock was heading south no matter what he did; he had a brief window before the news became public, during which he dumped his stock. Not admirable behavior (and anybody who bought stock during that period may have a fraud case against him), but it's hard to say that action took a dime out of any existing shareholders' pockets. There may have been other factors; I didn't follow Waksal's case. But he makes a hell of a credenza doily.

[twistedmerkin]

Regarding the justification for FDA rejection, check out:

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2003/tc20030611_8738_tc024.htm

[Eric E. Coe]

Maybe the two cases are different? Sam Wiskal was charged and convicted for insider trading. Martha Stewart, while accused of insider trading by the SEC, was charged and convicted on the coverup she attempted for her friend - the insider trading charge was not strong enough to stick. And the legal proceedings for Stewart are not finished yet.

Seems like a real apples vs. oranges situation.

[Anonymous]

Seems like the real crook in all this is the FDA. They are the ones with the real power to manipulate, I wonder how many FDA people own stock in the companies they deal with? Wouldn't it be easy to buy stock in a company right before you approve a drug? Or dump right before you disapprove? Or tell someone you're going to disapprove, let them dump stock to bring the price down, buy reduce price stock yourself, then change your mind and approve the drug?

[Camerata Julie]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://www.enlargement-for-penis.com
DATE: 01/26/2004 11:35:43
Assassination is the extreme form of censorship.