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

To: Cicero
Ah, well. I think she was railroaded. But I can't say I like her very much.

I agree. The person who was at fault was her broker, who had no business telling Martha of any insider information. In a way it is kind of like entrapment. Martha did not go out looking for insider information, it was placed in her lap by her broker.

10 posted on 03/05/2004 1:52:02 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Always Right
No one held a gun to her head and forced her to act on it.
12 posted on 03/05/2004 1:53:37 PM PST by Xenalyte (I may not agree with your bumper sticker, but I shall defend to the death your right to stick it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
"Martha did not go out looking for insider information, it was placed in her lap by her broker."

Ah, Martha "Geraldine" Stewart. The Devil made her do it.

13 posted on 03/05/2004 1:53:46 PM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
BTW, who "made" Martha Stewart lie repeatedly to the FBI?
14 posted on 03/05/2004 1:54:51 PM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
If this were 'Joe Average', I might consider some liency, however Martha Stewart is hardly an average person when it comes to trading. Martha Stewart was a licensed broker for over 20 years. Prior to appearing in public to face charges, she resigned her seat on the NYSE. Not only did she know better, she was in a position where getting insider information was a daily occurance; and knew she was legally and morally obligated to ignore it when it came to trading.

Martha was very foolish, she KNEW what she was doing was illegal, thus began covering her tracks immediately - even before the formal charges were made. This may only be the first time she's been caught; if you are willing to assume a person who did indeed do this (and had her day in court) NEVER contimplated doing the exact same thing for over 20 years. There is a distinct liklihood that this is just the first time she's been caught.
16 posted on 03/05/2004 1:59:58 PM PST by Hodar (With Rights, comes Responsibilities. Don't assume one, without assuming the other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
In a way it is kind of like entrapment. Martha did not go out looking for insider information, it was placed in her lap by her broker.

She is a former licensed broker on the NYSE and I believe was a board member of the NYSE when she got the tip. She knew exactly what she was doing and knew damn well it was a serious crime.

If she were just some wealthy housewife playing the market who was unaware of the law, I'd say to cut her some slack and lay it all on the broker. She was an insider playing a game far too many insiders play. She knew the rules and thumbed her nose at them and then did her best to cover her tracks. Sorry, I have no sympathy. She knowingly screwed other people out of their money to benefit herself and don't give a damn about the damage she did to them. Why should anyone give a damn about her?

34 posted on 03/05/2004 2:29:12 PM PST by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
>>In a way it is kind of like entrapment. Martha did not go out looking for insider information, it was placed in her lap by her broker.<<

It was unethical for her broker to call her, but Martha made a serious ethical error when she acted on the information. Both are guilty.

Muleteam1

35 posted on 03/05/2004 2:29:21 PM PST by Muleteam1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
Martha did not go out looking for insider information, it was placed in her lap by her broker.

It matters not how she got the information. Anyone who uses information that hasn't been made public for personal gain in the stock market can rightfully be subjected to investigation and prosecution for insider trading.

36 posted on 03/05/2004 2:29:25 PM PST by MegaSilver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
Ah, well. I think she was railroaded. But I can't say I like her very much.

I agree. The person who was at fault was her broker, who had no business telling Martha of any insider information. In a way it is kind of like entrapment. Martha did not go out looking for insider information, it was placed in her lap by her broker.

We are a nation of laws, despite Bill Clinton's efforts to the contrary. The law says that if you receive inside information, and you know it is inside information, you may not act on it. It doesn't matter if you are the CEO of the company, his broker, or another client. It doesn't matter if you found the information left in a public toilet. If it is non-public information, you have an unfair advantage over the general public, and acting upon it is patently and specifically illegal. Martha knew the information came straight from the horse's mouth (Waksal) and acting upon this insider information is a clear violation of the law.

There was an insider trading case in the 1970s which involved employees of Sorg Printing. Sorg was one of the primary printers of financial documents in the country. If a corporate raider wanted to attempt to take over another company, documents had to be printed in advance, in preparation for the surprise announcement. Some of the printers actually took the time to read the stuff they were printing, and, like knowing tomorrow's lottery numbers today, were able to make tons of money. They were caught, convicted and imprisoned.

By the way, getting Bette Currie to hide Monica's gifts under her bed is also obstruction of justice. Martha Stewart is not above the law, but Bill Clinton is.

47 posted on 03/05/2004 2:42:49 PM PST by TruthShallSetYouFree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
Martha Stewart is the head of a company, she is not your average person who doesn't know of regulations in the stock market. As a broker once, I can tell you that there are disclosure documents for someone of her stature. She is held to a higher standard, and rightly so, as far as knowing and behaving within the boundaries of securities' laws. You can rest assured that as the head of a publicly traded company she is not your average investor who didn't know that she could not act on that insider information.
51 posted on 03/05/2004 2:50:51 PM PST by cupcakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
BTW, it is a appropriate her broker also got in trouble. He too is held to a higher standard in regards to securities trading.
52 posted on 03/05/2004 2:51:31 PM PST by cupcakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
Oh common! She was head of the SEC and a Stock Broker herself. She was just plain avaricious and above the law.
Not innocent and not railroaded!
60 posted on 03/05/2004 3:20:51 PM PST by wingnuts'nbolts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
You wrote:

"I agree. The person who was at fault was her broker, who had no business telling Martha of any insider information. In a way it is kind of like entrapment. Martha did not go out looking for insider information, it was placed in her lap by her broker."

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Were you aware that Martha herself...used to be a broker. And also held a seat on the NYSE?

Fwiw-

82 posted on 03/05/2004 4:24:57 PM PST by Osage Orange (Ignore The Propaganda.....................Focus On What You See.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
Martha knew EXACTLY what she did. This is why she changed the e-mail. She was also a Wall Street trader. She has NO excuse for what she did. As a former trader she knows this IS breaking the law. She is getting what she deserves.
97 posted on 03/05/2004 7:39:50 PM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

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