| Author |
Message |
    
gozerbrown
Citizen
Username: Gozerbrown
Post Number: 371
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Friday, March 5, 2004 - 3:11 pm: |     |
Martha's guilty. |
ReallyTrying
Citizen
Username: Reallytrying
Post Number: 284
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 5, 2004 - 3:17 pm: | |
Full story at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4429271/.
|
ReallyTrying
Citizen
Username: Reallytrying
Post Number: 285
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 5, 2004 - 3:18 pm: | |
MSNBC.com
FACT FILE Charges in Stewart case
Here are the government’s charges against Martha Stewart and former stockbroker Peter Bacanovic:
GUILTY
Alleges Stewart and Bacanovic "willfully and knowingly" worked together to obstruct justice and make false statements in the stock-trading scandal.
GUILTY
Alleges, among other things, Stewart lied when she told the Securities and Exchange Commission, FBI and federal prosecutors she had prearranged with Bacanovic to sell ImClone when it fell below $60 per share.
Alleges, among other things, Stewart lied when she told the SEC, FBI and prosecutors that she did not recall being told on Dec. 27, 2001, that the Waksal family was selling ImClone stock.
GUILTY
Alleges that, from January to April 2002, Stewart "willfully and knowingly" tried to hamper the SEC investigation of her stock sale by providing misleading information.
GUILTY
Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum dismissed this charge Friday, Feb. 27. Prosecutors had alleged Stewart knowingly made misleading remarks to prop up the stock of her company, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia.
GUILTY
Alleges Stewart and Bacanovic "willfully and knowingly" worked together to obstruct justice and make false statements in the stock-trading scandal.
GUILTY
Alleges Bacanovic lied when he told regulators he had had a conversation with Stewart in which she decided to sell ImClone when it reached $60 per share. Also alleges he lied about a Dec. 27, 2001, conversation in which he told Stewart the stock price had dropped.
NOT GUILTY
Alleges Bacanovic altered a worksheet of Stewart's portfolio to make it appear he and Stewart had prearranged to sell ImClone when it fell below $60.
GUILTY
Alleges Bacanovic lied repeatedly in a Feb. 13, 2002, interview with SEC investigators, particularly about his conversations with Stewart in the weeks surrounding her sale of ImClone stock.
GUILTY
Alleges that, from January to April 2002, Bacanovic "willfully and knowingly" tried to hamper the SEC investigation of Stewart's stock sale.
The maximum penalty for each count is five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. If convicted, both are likely to get far lighter penalties than the maximum under federal sentencing guidelines.
Source: The Associated Press |
Cato Nova
Citizen
Username: Cato_nova
Post Number: 80
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 5, 2004 - 3:19 pm: | |
A complete travesty of justice. She is charged with lying to cover up a crime for which she was not even charged. It is another example of the patriarchy slapping down a powerful woman. |
sportsnut
Citizen
Username: Sportsnut
Post Number: 976
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 5, 2004 - 3:38 pm: | |
Finally. Slap her on the wrist and let's move on already. All of the wasted resources on this case should have been re-directed towards prosecuting those responsible for Enron, Tyco, WorldCom etc. |
Sylad
Citizen
Username: Sylad
Post Number: 409
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, March 5, 2004 - 4:12 pm: | |
The dopes from Enron and Worlcom will have their day in court unless they cut a deal. Regardless they will do time. Martha is a dope, she lied for a gross profit of $60K. She deserves what she gets. |
LibraryLady (ncjanow)
Citizen
Username: Librarylady
Post Number: 1268
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 5, 2004 - 6:17 pm: | |
Martha's guilty and O.J.'s innocent. What a world!
Nancy Chiller Janow
On a coffee break..or something like it. |
Cato Nova
Citizen
Username: Cato_nova
Post Number: 81
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 5, 2004 - 7:50 pm: | |
Meanwhile, 10,000 rapist priests run free, as do the Bishops and Cardinals that protected them. The Church is run like a wide-scale criminal enterprise and they go after entrepeneurs like Martha. It makes me sick. |
Redsox
Citizen
Username: Redsox
Post Number: 430
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 6, 2004 - 12:09 pm: | |
cato nova - your bigotry is showing..
why not put a negative post in about ame pastors, evangelicals, rabbis, & muslim clerics - .......
i'll tell you why not, because it's much more pc & fashionable to attack the catholic church...
alas,- back to m.s. - when you piss all over the little people- see what can happen to you.
her wall st. background cooked her....
|
Cato Nova
Citizen
Username: Cato_nova
Post Number: 84
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 7, 2004 - 2:47 pm: | |
Redsox:
Bigotry? Are you accusing me of being anti-catholic?
Who can more legitimately be accused of betraying the Church? Those Latin American pastors who realized that the Gospel meant that ministering to the poor included trying to ameliorate their poverty? Or the Church hierarchy that crushed them?
The members of Voice of the Faithful, who try to heal the wounds caused by child rapists? Or the bishops who covered up decades worth of child rape, and who forbid Voice of the Faithful from meeting in church, and who refuse to meet with them?
Gay and lesbian catholics, who love god and worship Jesus? Or the allegedly celibate clerics who decide what kind of sexuality is allowed? |
Redsox
Citizen
Username: Redsox
Post Number: 432
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, March 7, 2004 - 6:09 pm: | |
ah yes,
i would say refering to the "Church" as being "run like a wide-scale criminal enterprise" as being anti-catholic.
revolution politics + religion = somebody's gonna get killed, and really killed in S.A.
i'm from boston- i know some of the people involved in starting voice of the faithful- they are all upscale professionals, leading citizens, and well respected...
believe me- the church is dialoging with these people...
and what does the martha stewart trial have to do with the Church?
back to martha
eight females & four males hardly make a 12 angry man jury.
the trial was held in cosmopolitan manhattan, not timbuktu.
martha got caught-lied-refused to cooperate, and would't take a deal
she's going to do an easy year at most...
and u know what cato,
when she get's out- she won't be slumming with you or me in the maplewood.... |
Dave
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6547
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Sunday, March 7, 2004 - 9:48 pm: | |
(Why is this topic here in the Virtual Cafe? I'm going to move it to soapbox tomorrow.)
The problem with the charge that Martha lied is that she wasn't under oath when she lied.
Essentially, she has been convicted of statements made while not under oath for a crime she was not charged with. Forget your preconceptions of Martha, successful women, rich people, etc. (and I've never been a fan).
You can say she was stupid and greedy, but it's still a sham and a travesty of justice. |
ashear
Citizen
Username: Ashear
Post Number: 1026
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 8, 2004 - 9:08 am: | |
Dave: see this post for why the fact she was not under oath does not matter: http://www.southorangevillage.com/cgi-bin/show.cgi?tpc=3127&post=206472#POST2064 72 |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page