Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Martha found GUILTY

Shak

New member
Martha Stewart and her stockbroker were found guilty on ALL charges brought against them....

I guess the question now is whether she'll get 5 years or not???
 
I read the pubic evidence and the relevant law, it was pretty obvious she was guilty from the start. She had to be hoping to get off based on her status as a famous person, either that or she's nuts, because they had her nailed.
 
I hope they do a special on how she decorates her cell. Do you think she will go country or maybe something a little more contemporary?
 
She got the biggest charge thrown out though, the fraud charge. Now she will get a slap on the wrist and go back to baking cookies. :chomp:
 
Oh, I take that back....Martha found guilty on all counts and Bacanovic found guilty on all but one charge.
 
I'm glad she got convicted. however I'm glad she got off on fraud charges, considering she was getting prosecuted for fraud because she told investigators she was innocent, and she wasn't under oath. which is bullshit.
 
The_Eviscerator said:
This is ridiculous. She didn't do anything any one of us wouldn't do.


No, what is ridiculous is she did this for about $250,000 dollars. While that is a lot of money to most people, that is an amount that she could afford to lose without batting an eye. In the end what brought her down was the same thing that gets most people, greed.
 
I thought I heard on CNN that the judge is bound to federal sencencing guidelines in this case, and that 15 months is the minimum jail term for these convictions.
 
big4life said:
No, what is ridiculous is she did this for about $250,000 dollars. While that is a lot of money to most people, that is an amount that she could afford to lose without batting an eye. In the end what brought her down was the same thing that gets most people, greed.

Yawn...the age old plebian cry, "greed". Please tell us why your money is more valuable to you than Stewart's is to her? Any possibility that a major reason why rich people are rich is that they DO worry, and thus prioritize, about their money more than poor people do? I love how the middle class lectures the rich on how they should be more willing to part with their money; I guess it aids them in their future confiscation programs that they vote for; "tax the rich".
 
atlantabiolab said:
Yawn...the age old plebian cry, "greed". Please tell us why your money is more valuable to you than Stewart's is to her? Any possibility that a major reason why rich people are rich is that they DO worry, and thus prioritize, about their money more than poor people do? I love how the middle class lectures the rich on how they should be more willing to part with their money; I guess it aids them in their future confiscation programs that they vote for; "tax the rich".


At the time of this, Martha stewart was a billionaire, so $250,000 to her was .25% of her wealth. Would you do something so stupid that you could face federal charges and up to 20 years in prison for less than 1% of your wealth? Why would anyone want to risk that for such a small amount of money? The only answer is greed or stupidity. Since she was involved in the stock market and her company was publically traded on the stock exchange, stupidity, or lack of knowledge of the laws regarding insider trading don't seem feasible, so that leaves greed.
 
big4life said:
At the time of this, Martha stewart was a billionaire, so $250,000 to her was .25% of her wealth. Would you do something so stupid that you could face federal charges and up to 20 years in prison for less than 1% of your wealth? Why would anyone want to risk that for such a small amount of money? The only answer is greed or stupidity. Since she was involved in the stock market and her company was publically traded on the stock exchange, stupidity, or lack of knowledge of the laws regarding insider trading don't seem feasible, so that leaves greed.

Stupidity would be more appropriate, for "greed" is too subjective a term. If one knows that certain actions are "illegal" then acting in such ways is risky due to the attached penalties.

No matter, her actions were not immoral, merely illegal.
 
Top Bottom