EX-HUBBY SAW FALL COMING (Martha)

New York Post ^ | 3/08/04 | JOHN LEHMANN

[jimbo123]

It also sends a message to Hitlery Clinton. But she's probably laughing at her friend Martha behind her back, too.

[jimbo123]

Exactly.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/national/8130039.htm

Posted on Sun, Mar. 07, 2004

Martha Stewart Still Faces Insider Trading Prosecution

By Andrew Caffrey, The Boston Globe Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News


Mar. 6 - Martha Stewart's troubles aren't over.

Even though Stewart faces jail for her conviction on federal criminal charges that she lied and obstructed justice, the home fashion executive also faces another prosecution on the core action that got her into so much trouble -- the December 2001 sale of ImClone Systems Inc. stock, which federal regulators said violated civil insider trading laws.

The US Securities and Exchanges Commission says Stewart, a former stockbroker herself, knew, or should have known, the hot tip about ImClone chief executive Samuel Waksal's stock sales that broker and fellow defendant Peter Bacanovic allegedly passed along to her was illegal inside information.

Stewart and Bacanovic weren't charged with illegal insider trading in the criminal trial because, many legal specialists have speculated, that aspect of the case was weakest. But the SEC's civil proceedings have a lower threshold of evidence than in a criminal proceeding, which these specialists said should make it easier for the government to prove those charges, especially since her defense already failed once before the jury in New York.

Currently the SEC case has been stayed pending the outcome of the criminal trial, but yesterday the securities agency left no doubt it intends to pursue Stewart and Bacanovic once the stay is lifted by the federal court.

"Obstructing SEC investigations and lying to the government are serious crimes with serious consequences," SEC spokesman Herb Perone said yesterday.

[SarahW]

I hate to see her doing more time than OJ.

She's a meanie, and a liar, but I can't see that the thing she lied about doing was any great crime against the "little guy". The stock in question is doing just fine, for one thing.

I think she ought to get a suspended sentence at the most. Community service might save her stinking soul.

[Reelect President Dubya]

Just be grateful that you temporarily got your pound of flesh, because it won't last long.

[dfwgator]

Thugs who rip off liquor stores get 20 years for stealing a couple hundred bucks. Martha "stole" millions. Lock her up and throw away the key.

[antivenom]

No wonder she and Hillary are such close friends...both are self serving liars and could care less about ANYONE around them...makes you see how a person like Hillary puts up with a POS of a husband...all of them are cut from the same cloth...

[antivenom]

Doesn't matter what people do, in situations like that...it is a MATTER of LYING that she was found guilty of.

It wasn't Bill Clinton's AFFAIR that got him in trouble...it was the COVER UP and LYING.

It is so obvious to see the closet Clinton admirers here at FR...

[Justin714]

So you're saying that if someone breaks the law and they have enough money they can be spared from doing time in prison?
Imagine what would happen if you and I are found guilty of the same crimes Martha committed.
Break the law, do the time...simple as that.

[antivenom]

AMEN sister! the 45,000 she kept is about a 1.50 to you and me with the wealth scenario of 30,000 a year.

[antivenom]

REALLY...do you think a person like Hillary or Bill Clinton could be "reformed"...well Martha is cut from the same cloth...ain't gonna happen...

[Howlin]

She met the jury.

And she was carrying a $12,000 purse when she met them........LOL.

Talk about arrogance!

[Montfort]

"The fine folks on this forum are glad to see her get time behind bars because of her ties to the democrat party. The mood would be reversed if Stewart were a big Republican."

There may be some truth to that statement with regard to some Republicans. The flaws are as follows:

1) Republicans have standards which cause them to be much quicker than Democrats to throw their own overboard when they do not measure up. Think Newt Gingrich and Bob Livingstone.

2) A Republican would have been less likely to think he or she could get away with this. A Republican usually knows that the deck is stacked against him when it comes to things like public opinion.

There are exception to the points I made above, but they are generally true.

[Howlin]

She has been publicly humiliated in the worst way.

You wouldn't think so if you listen to all of Martha's friends on TV over the weekend; to a person, they STILL believe we are dumb and they are right, not to mention better than the rest of us.

[Howlin]

The truth is that most people want to see her hang because of who she rathet than what she did.

You're speaking for yourself, I presume?

And you have obviously forgotten that "who she is" is a criminal.

[Howlin]

That's why she tried so frantically to cover up and lie in her effort to obstruct justice.

Exactly! If she did nothing wrong, why all the activity afterwards???

Don't forget, she did all that stuff AFTER she knew they were investigating her and AFTER she had hired a highpowered defense team! Amazing!

[cartoonistx]

[Howlin]

If the jurors were annoyed by the fact that she didn't testify, that could be grounds for an appeal.

Every juror I saw said they would have liked to have heard from her, but that they knew that it was her right not to testify.

And it is my understanding that the appeals have to be based on JUDICIAL ERRORS, i.e., the judge.

[Walkingfeather]

But she said Stewart should be spared prison. Instead, she should be made to devote her money and energies to running a "meals on wheels" program for elderly folk.


First I don't see martha as the Babetts feast type

"If she goes to prison, I guess she could teach other prisoners how to cook. That would help their self-esteem," Collier said.

And second, it was her high self esteem that got her into trouble in the first place.

[Carolinamom]

Just be grateful that you temporarily got your pound of flesh, because it won't last long.

Most attorneys I've heard discussing the possibility that Martha's appeal will be successful think it will fail. On what basis do you think she will succeed?

[Howlin]

What would I have done with information that was obtained illegeally, whether it be from the owner or her broker, is that your question?

Isn't the point that she had information that she wasn't entitled to, regardless of how she got it?

The thing is, I would have done the RIGHT THING....and taken the loss......as the rest of the people who owned that stock had to do.

The real irony of this case is that the information Waksal got wasn't exactly right -- the drug wasn't passing a FEW GUIDELINES.

It was approved on February 8th of this very year.