The Verdict Was Mail Fraud

News at Reason: It will soon be up to a jury to decide whether Martha Stewart is guilty on charges of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and/or securities fraud. (I think things are looking pretty grim for Martha, but I'm no expert.) Jacob Sullum helpfully steps back to recall how hokey the Ashcroft Justic Department's charges against the doyenne of the den really are.

Comments

[Tommy_Grand]

“BLUE OYSTER HATES IMCLONE….”

From the political side, there are some problems with this prosecution. I think MS is being singled out/ made an example of in this matter. Others, who did worse, are not on trial. Maybe it’s sexism. More likely: it’s a prosecutor trying to make a career by taking down a celeb. Nevertheless, the case is hardly groundless as a legal matter.

Q: If MS got inside info indicating that IMC was about to tank, and she sold before imclone dropped, and later tried to conceal this act, why shouldn’t she be prosecuted?

Fact: MS got inside info. She was told that SW was dumping shares by insiders before this fact became public knowledge. This is clearly true.

Allegation: The government alleges MS knew that SW was selling b/c He had ACTUAL inside info. This is hardly unreasonable and not difficult to believe. There may not be proof beyond a resonable doubt of this, but it’s pretty obvious to me that MS knew SW wouldn’t dump otherwise. The government believes further (but apparently cannot prove) that MS knew EXACTLY why SW was selling – but the precise info MS deduced from the “Sam is dumping Imclone stock” message is basically irrelevant. She knew something other investors didn’t.

FACT: MS acted on this info. Not much dispute here.

FACT: MS made some attempts to conceal that (1) she got a tip; & (2) she acted on the tip.

I think she should be convicted – but I won’t be upset if the jury decides to nullify.

[Warren]

Q: If MS got inside info indicating that IMC was about to tank, and she sold before imclone dropped, and later tried to conceal this act, why shouldn’t she be prosecuted?

Because that isn’t a crime dumbass.

[Tommy_Grand]

Getting a blowjob isn’t a crime (anymore).

Lying about it is.

[Mo]

Tommy,
Only when you’re under oath.

[Rick Barton]

CNBC just reported the judge threw out count 9, the securities fraud charge, and scolded the government. Yes!

[Critic]

That’s a good thing. (sorry)

[FYI]

NEW YORK – A federal judge on Friday threw out the most serious charge against Martha Stewart, securities fraud, just before her trial goes to a jury.

The charge accused Stewart of deceiving investors in her company, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, by lying about her sale of ImClone Systems stock.

“Here, the evidence and inferences the government presents are simply too weak to support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt of criminal intent,” the judge wrote.

U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum left intact four other charges against the celebrity homemaker – conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and two counts of lying to investigators.

[Skip Oliva]

The Martha Stewart case is the most recent example of the Justice Department (under both Ashcroft and Reno) trying to suppress speech and dissent under the guise of general law enforcement. You see this all the time in antitrust, where defendants are told that if they try to defend themselves on civil antitrust charges, they will face criminal charges down the line. Hence 90% of civil antitrust cases are settled without a fight. Antitrust settlements often authorize the government to engage in censorship, usually in the form of prohibiting defendants from speaking with one another about certain business matters.

Stewart was targeted for one major reason: She wouldn’t beg for mercy when the government came a’calling. The modern DOJ is used to people sucking up to them. When someone breaks the mold, they are labelled a criminal.

[Topdogchad]

Martha Stewarts greatest “crime” is that she didn’t want to lose any money.

Insider trading should not be considered a crime, and I don’t want to hear any whining about a “level” or “fair” playing field. If you’re looking for a risk taking venture in which all participants have the same opportunity to learn exactly the same information then go to Vegas and knock yourself out. Otherwise, understand that when you invest in the stock market you are competing for useful info just like everyone else, and that some are better at it than others.

[Famous Quote]

There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. — Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged (1957)

Useless laws weaken the necessary laws. — Charles Louis de Secondat, Baron De Montesquieu, De L’Esprit des Lois, 1748

The more corrupt the Republic, the more the laws. — Giovanni Sartori

[tae_diggety]

a h e m.

she is gonna do one to three,
and anyone who thinks a former
stock-broker shouldn’t do time when
she games the system to avoid losses
by using information she knew was the con-
fidential information (i.e., PROPERTY!)
of another — and knew that the other was
duty-bound to keep such property from
being mis-used. . . must prefer the
australian lottery scams as a retirement
investment over the n.y.s.e. and the n.a.s.d.a.q.

here endeth the lesson.

[Lowther Tori]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 210.18.158.254
URL: http://preteen-sex.info
DATE: 05/20/2004 09:49:23
Imitation is the sincerest form of television.