March 4, 200521 yr http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,149388,00.html I was sick to my stomach watching the news last night. All they freekin talked about was Martha Stewart. Would any of you mind telling me what's so special about her? All she is is another white collar crook who made money illegally then lied about it in court. The media all fawned over her and let out a collective "awwwwwwww" when she started whining about being in jail and federal sentencing guidelines ( even though she was imprisoned in a resort ) & dumbass people kept sending her money and gifts ( which she probably kept ) even though she's insanely wealthy. People like that need to be put in a real prison and treated like a real prisoner. I say tear down the federal resort prisons and turn em all into "pound me in the ass" prisons.
March 4, 200521 yr I was just watching CNBC at work and they have choppers over her house watching her feed her horses :puke LET IT DIE ALREADY
March 4, 200521 yr Author QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 08:58 AM) I was just watching CNBC at work and they have choppers over her house watching her feed her horses :puke LET IT DIE ALREADY I was watching the same thing. LOL! I always watch CNBC while I get ready for work.
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 09:55 AM) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,149388,00.html I was sick to my stomach watching the news last night. All they freekin talked about was Martha Stewart. Would any of you mind telling me what's so special about her? All she is is another white collar crook who made money illegally then lied about it in court. You do know that she was never incarcerated for making money illegally right?
March 4, 200521 yr Author QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 10:38 AM) You do know that she was never incarcerated for making money illegally right? Right, she was convicted of perjury if memory serves.
March 4, 200521 yr Not perjury either. Obstruction of Justice and Lying to government officials (That's a different crime than Perjury.)
March 4, 200521 yr Author QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 10:51 AM) Not perjury either. Obstruction of Justice and Lying to government officials (That's a different crime than Perjury.) Gotcha.
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 10:51 AM) Not perjury either. Obstruction of Justice and Lying to government officials (That's a different crime than Perjury.) IIRC, she could've taken the 5th and refused to talk to the Feds instead of lying. She basically set herself up. That said, what she did wasn't much different than what many other wealthy Americans with connections to higher-ups in companies do. Very few of them are ever prosecuted. Edited March 4, 200521 yr by TheBigHurt35
March 4, 200521 yr Awwwww, she's feeding her horses. :puke :puke :puke Who the f*** cares? Apparantly a lot of people do. :puke :puke :puke
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 11:13 AM) No kidding, I can't stand her. She should still be in jail where she belongs. :rolly As soon as the people that did what was done in Enron are rotting in jail, then let's talk about the small potatoes known as Martha Stewart.
March 4, 200521 yr Well, this is definately important stuff. Its not like we're looking for any terrorists (osama) or trying to maintain democracy in a explosive environment (Iraq). So thank god we have such important news to follow.
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 11:38 AM) :rolly As soon as the people that did what was done in Enron are rotting in jail, then let's talk about the small potatoes known as Martha Stewart. I never said the people in Enron shouldn't be in jail.
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 11:38 AM) :rolly As soon as the people that did what was done in Enron are rotting in jail, then let's talk about the small potatoes known as Martha Stewart. /\ And WCOM, and TYCO, and so on and so on...
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 11:55 AM) /\ And WCOM, and TYCO, and so on and so on... TYCO almost bought the last company I worked for but that was kaboshed and Invensys bought them.
March 4, 200521 yr Ok, I can kind of see why her legal troubles made headlines, but she was MEGA huge even before that. Why exactly? Is she the 1st successful female? No. 1st person to go from rags to riches? No. Help me out here. Just wait til the book and movie come out and she does the talk show circuit. We'll need the Martha channel.
March 4, 200521 yr She was sent to jail for a questionable stock deal that made her 45,000 dollars. She was convicted on lesser charges related to a larger charge that didn't stick. It seems odd to me that someone could or should be convicted for charges directly related to charges that she has been cleared for.
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 12:50 PM) She was sent to jail for a questionable stock deal that made her 45,000 dollars. She was convicted on lesser charges related to a larger charge that didn't stick. It seems odd to me that someone could or should be convicted for charges directly related to charges that she has been cleared for. But you just said earlier that she was convicted of Obstruction and Lying to Government Officials. It really doesn't matter what she was lying about.
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 01:14 PM) If you're not lying under oath, why should it be a crime? She wasn't under oath? I wasn't aware of that. I thought she was charged for what she told a grand jury, but I could be mistaken. I didn't follow the case closely because, frankly, I don't give a rat's ass about Martha Stewart. Many people think that Martha was unfairly targeted because she was a successful woman. I don't necessarily disagree with that, but still think that only an idiot would lie to the Feds.
March 4, 200521 yr If you are under oath and you lie, you are perjuring yourself. She was not charged with perjury.
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 01:35 PM) If you are under oath and you lie, you are perjuring yourself. She was not charged with perjury. OK, but I still think that she can be legitimately charged with obstruction. She tampered with an e-mail from her broker and her broker doctored her portfolio (most likely after she told him to). Tampering with evidence sounds like obstruction to me. And let's not forget about the phone call she made to ImClone's founder after he dumped a bunch of his company's stock. They have a recorded message of her asking him what was going on with his company. That's pretty shady and, fortunately for her, the securities fraud charges didn't stick (apparently she wasn't specific enough in her veiled attempt to obtain insider information). IMO, she obviously did something illegal and was attempting to cover it up.
March 4, 200521 yr But it wasn't found illegal. If she didn't break the law to begin with, why is covering up the legal but shady thing she did illegal?
March 4, 200521 yr QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 4, 2005 -> 01:47 PM) But it wasn't found illegal. If she didn't break the law to begin with, why is covering up the legal but shady thing she did illegal? Because she doctored evidence in a criminal investigation. The legality of what she tried to cover up is irrelevant. The act of tampering with evidence is a crime in itself.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.