Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

( Martha ) Stewart gets fined $195,000 in plea deal
Associated Press ^ | August 8, 2006 | Dan Caterinicchia And Anne D'Innocenzio

Posted on 08/08/2006 8:12:46 AM PDT by george76

Homemaking diva Martha Stewart will pay about $195,000 and cannot serve as the director of a public company for five years under a settlement announced Monday on civil insider trading charges with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Under the settlement, the founder of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia Inc., a multimedia empire dedicated to stylish living, agreed to make a payment relating to losses the government said she avoided on her sale of ImClone Systems Inc. stock in December 2001.

Stewart agreed to pay $45,673, the amount of losses she avoided from her insider trading, plus $12,389 in interest.

But the bulk of the payment comes from the maximum civil penalty of $137,019, three times the amount of losses avoided.

In addition to accepting a five-year ban on being a company director, Stewart agreed to limits for five years on her service as an officer or employee of a public company.

During that period, she will be prohibited from participating in financial reporting and disclosure, internal controls, audits, SEC filings and monitoring compliance with the federal securities laws.

(Excerpt) Read more at rockymountainnews.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: corruption; imclone; imclonesystems; marthastewart; omnimedia; sec; stewart

1 posted on 08/08/2006 8:12:48 AM PDT by george76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: george76

No caviar for Martha this month.


2 posted on 08/08/2006 8:15:27 AM PDT by Ron in Acreage (VOTE DEMOCRAT--TERRORISTS ARE COUNTING ON IT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

The world is safer now. Martha, please make us some yummy cookies.


3 posted on 08/08/2006 8:17:50 AM PDT by monkapotamus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76
chump change
4 posted on 08/08/2006 8:18:52 AM PDT by Doogle (USAF...8th TFW...Ubon Thailand...408thMMS..."69"...Night Line Delivery...AMMO!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Chocolate Chip Cookies

Makes about 3 dozen

2 cups all-purpose flour

1 teaspoon baking soda

1 teaspoon salt

2 sticks (1 cup) unsalted butter, softened

1 cup granulated sugar

1/2 cup packed dark-brown sugar

2 teaspoons pure vanilla extract

1 large whole egg, plus 1 large egg white

12 ounces semisweet chocolate chips (about 2 cups)

1. Preheat oven to 375°, with racks in upper and lower thirds. Line two large baking sheets with parchment paper; set aside. In a medium bowl, whisk together flour, baking soda, and salt; set aside. In the bowl of an electric mixer fitted with the paddle attachment, beat the butter and both sugars on medium speed until light and fluffy, about 3 minutes, scraping down the sides of the bowl as needed.

2. Add vanilla, whole egg, and egg white. Beat on low speed until well combined, scraping down sides of the bowl as needed, about 1 minute. Add flour mixture in two batches; mix until just combined. Mix in chocolate chips.

3. Shape 2 heaping tablespoons of dough at a time into balls and place about 1 1/2 inches apart on prepared baking sheets. Bake, rotating sheets halfway through, until cookies are golden brown, about 18 minutes. Transfer parchment and cookies to a wire rack to cool completely. Cookies can be kept in an airtight container at room temperature for up to 4 days.

link

5 posted on 08/08/2006 8:24:04 AM PDT by monkapotamus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: george76

She should send all her fines to Hillary with the attached note 'This shoulda been you'.


6 posted on 08/08/2006 8:28:13 AM PDT by Mrs. Shawnlaw (No NAIS! And the USDA can bugger off, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monkapotamus

My brother uses Crisco instead of butter for his choc. chip cookies. He says it keeps them softer, but it's just wrong.

http://www.goodeatsfanpage.com/Humor/SNL/Martha11.htm


7 posted on 08/08/2006 8:31:43 AM PDT by tumblindice (The Associated Pimps. Is there anything they don't know?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: george76
Glad that is finally over. Too much attention that actually was good for her. She probably gained back all the loses she did have and is better for it. But she should never have gone this far. She should have quickly apologized and paid whatever fine she would of had to pay and be done with it. The mistake for her was that she thought she would win the case. Too big of an ego. She should of used humility and she would not have gone through that. She did learn a lesson though so that part is good.
8 posted on 08/08/2006 8:33:00 AM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Shawnlaw; george76; Liz

"She should send all her fines to Hillary with the attached note 'This shoulda been you'."

Martha will probably have less donations to $inator Hilldebea$t after these fines


9 posted on 08/08/2006 8:34:59 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (There's a dwindling market for Marxist Homosexual Lunatic wet dreams posing as journalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Her legal bill is likely even a bigger number.

If she can not be an officer in a corporation for five years, what will she do ?

The loss of these years ( already and into the future ) was a huge mistake for her.


10 posted on 08/08/2006 8:36:37 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

It is nice to see a big jerk like Martha self destruct.


11 posted on 08/08/2006 8:40:05 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Shawnlaw

I am still waiting for Hillary to explain how she made $100,000 on a few commodity trades.

And if she was that good, why did she stop ?


12 posted on 08/08/2006 8:41:54 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: george76

I've never even liked Martha, but I have to tell ya that watching this dog and pony show leveled at her has brought one word to mind. "DISPROPORTIONATE"

If something else needs to be done to teach this "B" a lesson, then do it and get it over with. Enough already!

I'm sick of hearing about it.


13 posted on 08/08/2006 8:43:37 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Bring your press credentials to Qana, for the world's most convincing terrorist street theater.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

Your right, but goodness she is 65 now and only needs 25 years or so of money in the bank to survive. I think she will be fine. I don't know why people seem to think they need so much more money then they already have. It seems silly to me to have 1 billion dollars in the bank and think that you really need that 350,000 dollars in order to survive life or something life that. I just don't get it and probably never will since I will never have 1 billion dollars.


14 posted on 08/08/2006 8:46:57 AM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: george76
was a huge mistake for her.

I'm still not convinced that she did anything wrong other than be a high profile target for an overzealous prosecutor. Seems like she sold some stock on the advice of her broker. Big deal.

I don't care for her personally, and am uninterested in her stuff. But she got a raw deal on this, IMHO.

15 posted on 08/08/2006 8:52:37 AM PDT by Ramius (Buy blades for war fighters: freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net --> 1400 knives and counting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator; Texas Songwriter; frithguild

People like Martha think that they need Billions so as to out brag the other billionaires.

It is about keeping score.

IMHO.

She will easily have enough money for retirement.

This illegal and clever stock deal was likely one of many.

The only problem for her was that ( 1 ) she got caught and ( 2 ) worse she repeatedly lied about it.


16 posted on 08/08/2006 8:55:27 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

I have enough money to live comfortably for the rest of my life - but I have to die by next Thursday.


17 posted on 08/08/2006 8:58:39 AM PDT by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ramius

Martha should have returned the money when she got caught ( if not sooner).

The big problem for Martha was when Martha continued to lie and try to cover up the trade.

Martha made herself an easy target.


18 posted on 08/08/2006 9:00:41 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: george76

That's"walkin'around"money for her!


19 posted on 08/08/2006 9:02:17 AM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

Except that she probably honestly believes that she did nothing wrong, just as I would have believed, had I done what she was "accused" of doing. The whole thing was dumb, IMHO. Continuing to pursue a case, where there was no original crime, is just asinine. Let it go and get out there and find some people actually breaking the law ~before~ the police get involved.


20 posted on 08/08/2006 9:09:31 AM PDT by Ramius (Buy blades for war fighters: freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net --> 1400 knives and counting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

"I just don't get it and probably never will since I will never have 1 billion dollars."

Me neither. I get to 100 million and I AM OUT OF HERE!

My ex father in law always used to say that he was working on his second million. He'd already given up on his first.

Martha risked so much for so little. She was alread a paper billionaire when she sold her Imclone stock. She had a billion and put it at risk it for 46 K. Plus 5 years of hassels, lawyers, prison and how much in legal fee's?

I made money on MSO when she owned up and said she was going to go ahead and go to prison. MSO went from about 13 to 18/19 in a week or so.


21 posted on 08/08/2006 9:19:07 AM PDT by garyhope (It's World War IV, right here, right now courtesy of Islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ramius
You have a good point.

Maybe she did not listen to her lawyers or maybe she had a bad defense attorney.

Martha could have reached some settlement early on. She has wasted and will continue to waste her time and alot more money.

As others have said, it was small money to her. She should have settled and moved on.
22 posted on 08/08/2006 9:25:24 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ramius

I agree, because that particular prosecutor is notorious. Also, while she contributed to the Dems, I think she was hated by them because she actually did do a lot to help just common everyday people. Her magazines did not talk down, the ladies at the supermarkets bought them and went home and made their houses prettier, and - horrors - did not need the Federal Government to tell them how to do this or buy them a prettier house.

And I agree - her punishment is way disproportionate. Particularly since everybody has a right to plead not guilty (the thing for which she is being punished) and even a fairly lefty writer came out and said that maybe she actually believed she wasn't guilty and had every right to plead that way. Like her or not, this was a politically staged event, and Eliott Spitzer thought he was going to ride to the White House by attacking Evil Wall Street and Evil Self-Made Millionaires.


23 posted on 08/08/2006 9:27:15 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
The mistake for her was that she thought she would win the case. Too big of an ego. She should of used humility and she would not have gone through that. She did learn a lesson though so that part is good.

That was her mistake, but the biggest mistake was the government going after her in a criminal case. The matter should have been handled solely as a civil case, but the government was looking for scapegoats for a bad economy, and they certainly didn't want anyone paying attention to their own corruption.

24 posted on 08/08/2006 9:35:05 AM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

If Hil got notes from all her indicted former campaign donors, she'd have quite a collection.


25 posted on 08/08/2006 9:58:43 AM PDT by Liz (The US Constitution is intended to protect the people from the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: george76
I thought that her crime was supposed to permanently bar her from holding a position on the board of a public company?

Her illegal sale of the Imclone stock also happened back in December of 2001. If the five year ban starts from the time of the infraction it would appear symbolic at best.

Anyone know if the ban starts now or back when she originally broke the law?

26 posted on 08/08/2006 11:56:35 AM PDT by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: garyhope
I made money on MSO when she owned up and said she was going to go ahead and go to prison.

Actually, Martha asked for and received permission to serve her prison sentence while her criminal appeal was still pending. I believe that appeal is still pending. (Note that this article deals only with a separate civil complaint by the SEC.)

27 posted on 08/08/2006 11:57:45 AM PDT by ravinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: george76
"Maybe she did not listen to her lawyers or maybe she had a bad defense attorney."

Actually, she had excellent counsel. He begged her to cut a deal and she refused, insisted on going to trial. At that point, all he could do was try to limit the inevitable damage.

As you've said, it's all about keeping score.

I think she did quite well. She did a short, easy stretch, garnering lots of sympathy from dolts who don't understand how threatening insider trading is. She's lost very little of her personal fortune, even with legal fees, and she can still go out and make all the money she wants.

I have no doubt that she'll continue to break the law. It's been ingrained in her for many years. I also believe she'll continue to get off easy.

28 posted on 08/08/2006 9:30:50 PM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson