C
Cut-Throat
Guest
Laws will always be with us, whether written or un-written. The only question is who do you want to make the laws - The Government or the individuals with the most money?
Yard sale methodology and etiquette
- Thread starter cute fuzzy bunny
- Start date
Laws will always be with us, whether written or un-written. The only question is who do you want to make the laws - The Government or the individuals with the most money?
I am still pretty upset about the Martha Stewart conviction, and BTW, if arrogance was a crime I'd be
in jail right now.
I would venture to guess that more people have speeding tickets and tickets for other violations for abusing the unwritten law, "Thou shalt be humble and respectful to all police officers when you are confronted for a violation," than for any other reason.
I am sometimes viewed as arrogant myself, but I'm smarter than to violate that law. We may not like it, John, but most people have learned the rules of engagement with law enforcement and it's difficult for me to have sympathy for Martha when she clearly broke the law and knew it.
Yeah. . . Most people have probably been guilty of speeding, or changing lanes too quickly, or leaving their trash container out after 6:00 PM on trash day, or jaywalking, or . . . People are not always as safe or considerate as the letter of the law requires. But what's the option? . . . Open up the roadways to any behavior you can survive?
Currently, if I get caught by a hidden camera running a red light or speeding, I don't have too many options. I have to pay the fine or go to driving school. I don't like the idea of having hidden cameras catching me on some marginal infraction, but if I was going 36 mph in a 25 mph residential area, I don't have a defense that works. So why should I feel sympathy for Martha Stewart profiting from illegal insider trading information at the expense of thousands of investors who were not given the same opportunity? I can't find a reason.
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
OP
OP
cute fuzzy bunny
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Martha is best summed up by her high school yearbook photo quote: "I do what I please and I do it with ease".
There are frequent themes throughout her business dealings. Former associates accuse her of stealing customers, taking money from the till, and general dishonesty. As a stockbroker she got friends hooked on deals and when they started heading south she got out while convincing her friends to stay the course. When the outfit she was working with went bankrupt she sallied off to another state and started over.
She convinced K-mart to buy her a house that unbeknowst to them, she already owned, and to pay for remodeling it as a publicity item. She vacationed with friends, pocketed their half of the cost and charged it to MSO. The billionaire regularly expensed her morning cups of coffee and pastries.
She created a persona of high detail, perfection and efficiency. The underlying reality was different. When faced with tax evasion charges by the state of new york, she claimed to have not been in the state during the dates in question. Her backup evidence was scraps of receipts and notes jotted down on small bits of paper. She had no daytimer, no details on where she had been and when. When the prosecution brought out photos from her own magazines taken in new york and legended with the very days she claimed she wasnt there, she insisted they were incorrect. In pursuing this to the ends of the earth, she exhausted appeals and the court all but called her a baldfaced liar. She eventually paid quite a bit in taxes, fines and penalties. Her facade of detail and awareness was simply that.
What she did wrong:
- Owned stock in a self directed account in companies that she has board level friends and personal connections. This is inviting trouble.
- She sold the stock a day before a major piece of bad news hit. Either she's clairvoyant, lucky, or had inside info.
- Here's the biggest thing, and already mentioned. When dealing with law enforcement, you need to do one of two things. Tell the absolute truth or say absolutely nothing. You are dealing with people that can fundamentally change your life for the worse and very quickly. She not only told a series of stories that were dramatically different from the other accounts of the event, she dismissed them in the midst of questioning several times by saying "you'll have to excuse me, I have a business to run". While there may be worse crimes in the world, and while statistically the average american breaks 5-7 laws per DAY, if you speed past a cop, then give him the finger, then tell him you didnt do it, you're getting a ticket.
- The second dumbest thing was the deal she was given, while not completely disclosed by the prosecution, appears to not even be a felony. Apparently it was a misdemeanor with a short probation and a fine, and she didnt even need to publicly admit guilt. The hang up was that the judge might reject the deal and give her short jail time instead of the probation...an unlikely but possible event. She could have simply done this and walked away with a minor ding. If you read the stuff above, you might understand why she simply couldnt do it though. In her Barbara Walters interview, her big point was that it was such a small amount of money, 50k, that she made, that it was a nothing deal and should have brought no attention. The arrogance and "this is beneath me" facade is really showing here.
- In the end, the jury was left to believe three things. That the queen of detail had in fact gotten an inside tip (which she had previously denied) but that although she responded within the hour and executed a transaction on stock in a company run by a close friend and her daughters ex boyfriend...that in two months she had no recollection of all of this and thus when she told the SEC she got no such tip, she had simply forgotten it. That on the $60 stop loss trade allegation, her broker, who was held up as an example of someone who always crosses every t and dots every i and never fails to fill out every scrap of paperwork...did none of that in this and only this stock trade. And that despite the facts that no two stories among any of the people involved matched up, that they were all telling some form of the same truth.
In many ways our country's legal system has become one in which one can buy all the justice they can afford. Poor minorities go to jail because they cant afford a reasonable defense while wealthy celebrities walk away free after multi-million dollar defenses.
Its in a way refreshing to see that money cant always buy a decision in court. That someone who thinks they're above the law and therefore can do what they want, the way that they want...will pay a price for that. Even if they look good on tv and we like them.
There are frequent themes throughout her business dealings. Former associates accuse her of stealing customers, taking money from the till, and general dishonesty. As a stockbroker she got friends hooked on deals and when they started heading south she got out while convincing her friends to stay the course. When the outfit she was working with went bankrupt she sallied off to another state and started over.
She convinced K-mart to buy her a house that unbeknowst to them, she already owned, and to pay for remodeling it as a publicity item. She vacationed with friends, pocketed their half of the cost and charged it to MSO. The billionaire regularly expensed her morning cups of coffee and pastries.
She created a persona of high detail, perfection and efficiency. The underlying reality was different. When faced with tax evasion charges by the state of new york, she claimed to have not been in the state during the dates in question. Her backup evidence was scraps of receipts and notes jotted down on small bits of paper. She had no daytimer, no details on where she had been and when. When the prosecution brought out photos from her own magazines taken in new york and legended with the very days she claimed she wasnt there, she insisted they were incorrect. In pursuing this to the ends of the earth, she exhausted appeals and the court all but called her a baldfaced liar. She eventually paid quite a bit in taxes, fines and penalties. Her facade of detail and awareness was simply that.
What she did wrong:
- Owned stock in a self directed account in companies that she has board level friends and personal connections. This is inviting trouble.
- She sold the stock a day before a major piece of bad news hit. Either she's clairvoyant, lucky, or had inside info.
- Here's the biggest thing, and already mentioned. When dealing with law enforcement, you need to do one of two things. Tell the absolute truth or say absolutely nothing. You are dealing with people that can fundamentally change your life for the worse and very quickly. She not only told a series of stories that were dramatically different from the other accounts of the event, she dismissed them in the midst of questioning several times by saying "you'll have to excuse me, I have a business to run". While there may be worse crimes in the world, and while statistically the average american breaks 5-7 laws per DAY, if you speed past a cop, then give him the finger, then tell him you didnt do it, you're getting a ticket.
- The second dumbest thing was the deal she was given, while not completely disclosed by the prosecution, appears to not even be a felony. Apparently it was a misdemeanor with a short probation and a fine, and she didnt even need to publicly admit guilt. The hang up was that the judge might reject the deal and give her short jail time instead of the probation...an unlikely but possible event. She could have simply done this and walked away with a minor ding. If you read the stuff above, you might understand why she simply couldnt do it though. In her Barbara Walters interview, her big point was that it was such a small amount of money, 50k, that she made, that it was a nothing deal and should have brought no attention. The arrogance and "this is beneath me" facade is really showing here.
- In the end, the jury was left to believe three things. That the queen of detail had in fact gotten an inside tip (which she had previously denied) but that although she responded within the hour and executed a transaction on stock in a company run by a close friend and her daughters ex boyfriend...that in two months she had no recollection of all of this and thus when she told the SEC she got no such tip, she had simply forgotten it. That on the $60 stop loss trade allegation, her broker, who was held up as an example of someone who always crosses every t and dots every i and never fails to fill out every scrap of paperwork...did none of that in this and only this stock trade. And that despite the facts that no two stories among any of the people involved matched up, that they were all telling some form of the same truth.
In many ways our country's legal system has become one in which one can buy all the justice they can afford. Poor minorities go to jail because they cant afford a reasonable defense while wealthy celebrities walk away free after multi-million dollar defenses.
Its in a way refreshing to see that money cant always buy a decision in court. That someone who thinks they're above the law and therefore can do what they want, the way that they want...will pay a price for that. Even if they look good on tv and we like them.
I bet this is Fate's way of getting Martha back for wasting all of those dryer sheets. She can trade all the stock she wants... club baby seals if she wishes. But when you tumble dry all willie-nillie... that's when she crossed the line.
