Martha Stewart Line of Orange Jump Suits
- Thread starter wileycoyote
- Start date
I think the case is probably too high of a profile case for her to not do some time. Remember, she did commit a felony. If she doesn't do time, the justice department will have set a dangerous precedence.
But she won't have it too bad at all in prison. More like going away for a extended summer camp. Ever hear of "Club Fed" or Allenwood, here in Pennsylvania? That is where the white collar criminals go to serve soft time.
I saw a TV special about Allenwood maybe 10 years ago, what a joke. Read more HERE
But she won't have it too bad at all in prison. More like going away for a extended summer camp. Ever hear of "Club Fed" or Allenwood, here in Pennsylvania? That is where the white collar criminals go to serve soft time.
I saw a TV special about Allenwood maybe 10 years ago, what a joke. Read more HERE
I agree a bad precedence has been set. However, we are wasting far too much money going after the small time criminals.
It makes me sick that we have spend so much money going after Stewart while others go free. Stewart benefited very little.
I have a master’s degree in finance from a respected catholic institution and I must say I do not remember anything even remotely reflective of the activities of Halliburton being anything but criminal.
We cannot continue basing our decisions on who the person is, and we must consider the crime at hand.
Some people have lost the equivalent of their kids entire college education funds while company executives walk away with huge sums.
I don’t think it should matter who the person is, even if it is the vice president. I have read every annual report produced by Halliburton and it does not add up.
Where is our justice, why is someone not looking out for us? I am outraged that we have wasted so much SEC time and money on Stewart where there are far bigger problems. Or should we say if you are going to commit significant accounting fraud make sure you are well connected first.
I am disappointed to say the least. But the good thing about our system is when some of us make a mistake, it can be corrected down the road. So I decided it has cost so much already, why not try something different. I just entered a monthly financial commitment to Kerry, I guess this is the beauty of our system, we can change our mind.
It makes me sick that we have spend so much money going after Stewart while others go free. Stewart benefited very little.
I have a master’s degree in finance from a respected catholic institution and I must say I do not remember anything even remotely reflective of the activities of Halliburton being anything but criminal.
We cannot continue basing our decisions on who the person is, and we must consider the crime at hand.
Some people have lost the equivalent of their kids entire college education funds while company executives walk away with huge sums.
I don’t think it should matter who the person is, even if it is the vice president. I have read every annual report produced by Halliburton and it does not add up.
Where is our justice, why is someone not looking out for us? I am outraged that we have wasted so much SEC time and money on Stewart where there are far bigger problems. Or should we say if you are going to commit significant accounting fraud make sure you are well connected first.
I am disappointed to say the least. But the good thing about our system is when some of us make a mistake, it can be corrected down the road. So I decided it has cost so much already, why not try something different. I just entered a monthly financial commitment to Kerry, I guess this is the beauty of our system, we can change our mind.
I agree with you Bryan, Martha profited relatively little from the transaction, and as a result there was very little harm done, although 51k is a lot of money on my ledger (a few who bought the shares she sold suffered losses). But if we base the gravity of the crime on profit, or harm, we begin to subscribe to relative moralism. Fact is Martha cheated, and therefore shoud be punished. But I hear what you are saying, the Feds have finite resource, and should focus on criminals who inflict serious harm or significant ill gains.
According to a news article I read, Martha "dug a hole" by:
1. Intentionally lying/deceiving after she was told they had solid evidence
2. Not bargaining and copping a lesser plea and ultimately going to trial
3. Not testifying herself
4. having a weak defense team
The post-game analysts say that she would not have done any time if she had admitted guilt. The Justice Dept. really wanted to nail her because she was lying, not for the $50K itself.
She should be suing her attorneys....
1. Intentionally lying/deceiving after she was told they had solid evidence
2. Not bargaining and copping a lesser plea and ultimately going to trial
3. Not testifying herself
4. having a weak defense team
The post-game analysts say that she would not have done any time if she had admitted guilt. The Justice Dept. really wanted to nail her because she was lying, not for the $50K itself.
She should be suing her attorneys....