Federal judge dismisses securities fraud charge against Martha Stewart
MrsTC
Posted:
Member since
Re: Martha News off CNN Breaking News
why celebrity justice i think
that annoys me
mrswask
Posted:
Member since
Re: Martha News off CNN Breaking News
That's a shocker!
Shamee
Posted:
Member since
Re: Martha News off CNN Breaking News
What b.s....
jennbaby
Posted:
Member since
Re: Martha News off CNN Breaking News
Posted by Shamee
What b.s....
sure is
nrvbrd
Posted:
Member since
Re: Martha News off CNN Breaking News
Why do I think this is so unfair?
Was it not proven that she indeed was guilty, based on testimony, phone messages etc?
She was given advance notice to sell her stock. Is this not true?
How is she getting away with this?
franksbride
Posted:
Member since
Re: Martha News off CNN Breaking News
I couldn't believe it...
Maribelle7777
Posted:
Member since
Re: Martha News off CNN Breaking News
Posted by franksbride
I couldn't believe it...
It's actually not BS, but Martha is still not aquitted of all the other (8) charges...obstructing justice, making false statement and conspiracy.
The securities fraud charge was brought up on her originally because the Feds were trying to say she made the statements about her innocents ONLY because she was worried about the investors of her own company selling their shares, therefore driving down the price of her company. In other words she used what she said to mislead investors in her own company.
The judge said for the jury to decide on that would mean that they would have to speculate. They can't do that as jurors. They have to be able to find, beyond reasonable doubt that she did lie for that purpose.
I think she won't get off on the other charges. I mean she wouldn't talk to Congress for weeks afterwards (obstructing justice).
Maribelle7777
Posted:
Member since
Re: Martha News off CNN Breaking News
Posted by nrvbrd
Why do I think this is so unfair?
Was it not proven that she indeed was guilty, based on testimony, phone messages etc?
She was given advance notice to sell her stock. Is this not true?
How is she getting away with this?
No, the trial was to determine if she had committed securities fraud by making the innocence statments to mislead her own investors in her own company.
The jury hasn't even started deliberating yet. So she's not actually guilty of anything yet. They start deliberating next week. The judge threw out the securities fraud, so now she's only charged with the other things she was charged with originally along with the securities fraud. One is obstruction of justice and another is conspiracy.
The fact that she was given notice about Sam Waksal was selling his stock before the FDA went public about his drug not being passed by the FDA is insider trading. (I'm sorry I am reading your sentence as if you think it was OK for her to sell. If I'm wrong I apologize!)