Replies

FROM MODERATOR:
Ms Stewart was not convicted for defrauding shareholders or insider trading. She was not charged for these crimes, as there was no basis for them. Ms Stewart was convicted for lying to authorities on something that is not a crime. So where is the crime? Lying? Convicted for the crime of lying! Now, that is a first in our very blemished justice system.

And for that, you are labeled a felon and go to jail?

This weasel just was slapped on the hand with a $2,000. fine for lying to authorities. This liar was instrumental in convicting Ms Stewart.

Something is very wrong in this society filled with envy and greed. Something is very wrong with our justice system when an investigation and a trial can be manipulated to someone's advantage.

Justice is not blind anymore. It is for sale and political advantage.

This is an outrage, a witch-hunt. Going after an entrepreneur that has contributed to the community and to the national economy, just because this entrepreneur is aggressive, resourceful, creative and speaks frankly.

Aren’t these the qualities that we look for in most successful CEO's?

Oh... but this entrepreneur is a woman... That changes everything…

She should be humble, cry a lot, depend on a man for good ideas, and apologize for bad behavior. At least, that is what some reporters say she should have done to avoid being convicted. Imagine that, a little woman can get sympathy from our courts, but not someone with guts!

Sorry, we just don't buy this idea of a woman's role in the closed minds of many in powerful positions today.

In my fight against communism, I, a married woman and a mother, had to work every day with a rifle pointing at me until I came to United States.

Conviction should be reversed!

Chachi Novellas-Bengochea
Delray Beach, Florida U.S.A.
FOR FREEDOM & JUSTICE GROUP
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ForFreedomandJustice
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

Wow. (sarcasm) $2000 and no jailtime?

Good. He cooperated to expose the crimes of the rich and famous and he should be rewarded for that. Bill and Hillary Clinton should have been prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to prison while Linda Tripp should have been completely exonerated. But enough of Bill and Hillary's friends did not testify against them.

What country had the time and money to point a rifle at "you" every day ?

If only she had thought of using the Berger defense;

Duhh, Gee, I's Sorry. I's just sloppy, yup, jus sloppy.

Okay, take a deep breath. From the beginning

Martha sold stock that she knew was over-valued. How did she know this? She was the recipient of inside information, which the buyer of the stock did not have, which caused the buyer to pay more than the stock is worth.

That's cheating.

You may be of the opinion, "buyer beware", and you may disagree with insider trading laws, but the laws are there. If you can't abide by the laws, don't trade stock. See, wasn't that easy?

Now, when Stewart gets caught and questioned by the Feds, she could have told the truth, and probably paid a civil penalty. But no, she doesn't just lie, she fabricates some fairy tale about an earlier agreed sale price.

AND here's the important part. Why does she lie? Because she knew what she did was wrong!!!(i.e. consciousness of guilt)

When the Feds come to your door (which is indication that the matter is serious)you have three options:
1. Tell the truth
2. Say "Go away, talk to my lawyer"
3. Lie

Option three is the only one that gets you in additional trouble.

You ask, "So where is the crime? Lying? Convicted for the crime of lying! Now, that is a first in our very blemished justice system."

If you look at the United States Code, there are various prohibtions against lying, such lying to a federal agent, lying to a grand jury, lying in court. etc.

You also state, " This is an outrage, a witch-hunt. Going after an entrepreneur that has contributed to the community and to the national economy, just because this entrepreneur is aggressive, resourceful, creative and speaks frankly. Aren’t these the qualities that we look for in most successful CEO's?"

Well, I'm sorry, but if a CEO has all those qualities, but is dishonest, I don't want him as a CEO.

From Cuba? Columbia?..

Anyway: It seemed pretty clear to me from before she was even indicted; from the first story that I heard on the subject, that she had enemies that had already determined that she would do time.

I think a lot of reporters must know more about the "behind the scenes" people that made sure Martha did time than they're willing to say (at least I haven't read - or seen - anything on it).

From Cuba? Columbia?..

Anyway: It seemed pretty clear to me from before she was even indicted; from the first story that I heard on the subject, that she had enemies that had already determined that she would do time.

I think a lot of reporters must know more about the "behind the scenes" people that made sure Martha did time than they're willing to say (at least I haven't read - or seen - anything on it).

CHACHI, 6 points in rebuttal.

1. Martha was not charged with insider trading because the prosecutors did not have a high degree of confidence they would win. And since the lying charge looked like a slam dunk they actually saved the taxpayers some money in the process. By doing so they also cut her a break. As for having basis for such a charge, there is plenty of basis, so much so in fact that the SEC could STILL charge her in a civil proceeding with insider trading.

2. You and the blowhards I've been hearing on TV (including Hannity, Cavuto etc) CANNOT just SAY she was targeted for being a woman. What's YOUR BASIS for this charge? You sound like a Democrat charging Bush with lying without evidence. Is there a crusade against business women in the US that I am not aware of? Who's targeting Oprah, or Carly Fiorina, or the millions of successful honest women in the industry? Please do not descend into sheer demagoguery.

3. Your signature says "IN GOD WE TRUST." Does your God want society's business leaders, the role models for millions of women in a America, to lie? If not, what's wrong with punishing them?

4. Why would Douglas Faneuil lie? Martha was basically found guilty of telling a different story than Douglas. If the truth was with Martha why would Douglas not simply tell the truth and all 3 of them would now be back at their old jobs. Note that he was not offered a deal!!! He threw himself at the mercy of the court and they decided to reward his honesty.

5. The difference between Douglas and Martha is that he lied and then repented, while she lied, then lied again, ordered her assistant to alter evidence, conspired with her broker to lie some more, and now lies again while wasting the taxpayers money with an appeal. The difference in sentencing these 2 kinds of liars is a $2000 fine vs. 5 months in jail. I think that's fair.

6. If you come from communism you should know that one of the biggest crime the commies committed was to transform their respective nations into a bunch of liars. Everybody had to tow the party line, otherwise the secret police would haul them in. You must have despised their incessant lying throughout your life there. Why do you now condone lying in the USA?

---

Lying takes MANY different forms.

Ms. Stewart lied.
If I lied like Ms. Stewart, I would have a bigger jail term.