Martha Stewart wasn't an insider at ImClone. She did not have inside information at ImClone. This is why she was not charged with insider trading.
Now, the SEC is going after her in civil court on insider trading - but wait until you hear their theory on the case. Stewart knew that Waksal was selling shares, because her broker told her. That is market information - not insider information. It is legal to trade on market information. However, the SEC contends that, on hearing Waksal was selling, Stewart inferred that the FDA was rejecting the application on Erbitux - which is insider information. So, under this theory, if you guess at insider information, you are guilty of insider trading.
As to why she lied to cover it up... I certainly have no particular insight, but I'd theorize she figured the feds were out to get her and make her an example. So she wanted to make sure they didn't get anything. The mere fact that she hadn't necessarily done anything illegal is far from a refuge.
And, of course, it's very hard to be sure she really did lie during those interviews, as we have only sketchy notes and agent recollections to go by. If lying during an investigation is illegal, I wish the investigators were required to record those conversations.
Drew Garrett
If lying during an investigation is illegal, I wish the investigators were required to record those conversations.
I think the lesson that everyone can take from this is that you shouldn't discuss anything with any Federal investigators.
No. She knew Waskal was selling shares because Waskal's broker told her. That is insider information - not market information