[WarrenC]

I read somewhere (National Review maybe?) that Martha S. was absolutely not guilty of insider trading - that even if she had said she sold because her broker advised her Imclone's CEO was selling, that is still not insider trading.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

I read somewhere (National Review maybe?) that Martha S. was absolutely not guilty of insider trading - that even if she had said she sold because her broker advised her Imclone's CEO was selling, that is still not insider trading.

That's exactly what I've been saying.

Sam W. calling her up and saying "sell" is insider-trading.

Her broker calling her up and saying "Sam W. is selling" is not insider information.

It's the same exact information you can get from the SEC, because insiders are required to notify the SEC when they buy or sell.

The DA was on a fishing expedition and manufactured a crime.

This is the same sort of garbage that the Florida DA is pulling on Rush Limbaugh.

Martha will, however, win on appeal.