What About Martha?

[phatch]

So what are all of you thinking about Martha's predicament?

What do you think of Martha in general?


Me, she's always rubbed me the wrong way. As to the indictment, it's all for false statements and she wasn't under oath. So while she was wrong, I don't believe she was criminal.

Phil

[Leo R.]

Phil,i don`t know that much about the Martha Stewart case.I gather that she has been receiving "a little financial help".
I`ve seen her name mentioned in previous posts,i missed part of a BBC television news report at the weekend.
From what i saw,she may be holding cookery classes in the state prison,with the permission of the judge,for quite a while.
She seems to have made some very ill advised decisions. Leo.

[Mezzaluna]

Ill-advised, I'll grant you that. Illegal? It's for the court to decide.

When I first saw her I was entranced. It was a Thanksgiving special years ago that included a turkey en croute, turkey-themed place settings and table decorations, etc. I watched her make a wedding cake with Julia Child once that included marzipan fruits. It was charming, and not too hard for most people to make if they can get the powdered colors (which she obligingly sells).

I don't know whether she's a fiend or a shrewd businesswoman off-camera, but I usually like what I see her cook on TV. Her cookbooks are a bit fussy, but not bad. I don't really care what kind of person she is, but if she broke the law, she should pay the penalty. I'm not sure about those who cry that she's a woman, and no man would be picked on like this. The truth will out, I suppose.

[phoebe]

In my thoroughly uninformed, out-of-the-loop opinion, she may well be guilty of insider trading. However, my guess is that she's not the only one. The feds are going after her in a big way in order to divert our attention from the really big guys who are "good friends" to the ruling party. Why not go after an uppity woman who, for all her financial success, isn't exactly popular? If you do, you look like you're doing your job and the public won't ask questions about your pals.

[kuan]

Judge: Well Martha, what do you have to say for yourself?

Martha: It was a mistake, I really meant to dump the veal stock!

Kuan

[Mezzaluna]

That's good, Kuan!

[chefboy2160]

Hey , my boys love food tv . However they do not like Martha .
They tell me she is condensending and they do not feel that she is talking through her own knowledge! My boys are 13 and 16 .
The 13 year old has helped me in this biz since he was 4 . There feeling is that if she does not know the truth of what she talks ,
well then how can she walk the walk and expect to be compensated for the knowledge of others .
I tell them its just tv and people get paid to act .
My thought would be that maybe kids can see the real thing from an act ! Does this follow us into our own lives ? I guess maybe we should ask Martha ? So Martha I ask Whats Up !!!!!!!!!!

[Anneke]

I think Martha is powerful enough to get an apology out of this when all is said and done.

Insider trading is criminal no matter how you look at it. It's a zero-sum game, so it's not a victim-less crime.

However, if all they could nail her with is a $50K profit due to insider trading, I'd say she's been keeping her nose pretty darned clean. Given her position, contacts, financial managers, etc, believe me, she had the opportunity for much greater gains. This sort of thing happens all the time, and only a handful of people get caught. They are clearly making an example out of her.

Martha gets picked on a lot and she's an easy target. I don't find her particularly pleasant, but that's no reason to have a double standard with her either. Lets hope justice prevails.

[alexia]

The interesting thing to me is that they not issued criminal charges for "insider trading" as such, but have charged her with obstruction. And most curiously, they have issued charges against her based on her public declaration that she is innocent, claiming that she did it to bolster her stocks. Well, what country are we living in if people can be charged criminally for proclaiming their innocence?

What gets me angry, though, is that so far they have not indited the officers of companies like Enron, World Com, etc. who have pilfered from their stock holders, their employees, used deceptive accounting practices, manipulated markets (as in gas prices, for ex), and whose greedy behavior has been a factor impairing the wider economy. I think inditing Stewart is just a red herring, an attempt to make it look like they're doing something. People like Ken Lay and others who pocketed millions (billions collectively) may wind up escaping. My cynical side also notes that Stuart is a big contributor to the Democratic party, while Lay is a Bush contributor and former business associate.

[holydiver]

I'm with Phoebe and Alexia this is just a big diversion to save the Ken lay's of the world...

[Leo R.]

Nice point by Alexia,mentioning Enron and World Com,wasn`t there also a whiff of scandal at Xerox?I supposed someone in high office wants to make it look like something is being done.
It`s nice to know that Britain isn`t the only nation that appears to have a two-tier system.

[KyleW]

From The Wall Street Journal:

"The 41-page indictment also charged Stewart with conspiracy and making false statements. The indictment charged Stewart's stockbroker, Peter Bacanovic, with perjury and obstruction of justice, among other charges."

also:

"Securities regulators charged homemaking superstar Martha Stewart with insider trading Wednesday and sued to bar her from heading a public company.
Stewart, 61, founder and chief executive of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia Inc. (MSO), also faces criminal insider-trading charges based on her 2001 sale of Imclone Systems Inc. (IMCLE) stock.
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil suit against Stewart in federal court in New York on the heels of a nine-count criminal indictment charging the media celebrity and her broker, Peter Bacanovic."

She has been charged with both committing the criminal offense of insider trading and is being sued in civil court by the S.E.C.

I have heard first hand that working for Martha Stewart is preety close to the Cybil Sheppard portrayal. IMHO she is a miserable person who is getting what she deserves.

Ask Richard Nixon about the cost of covering up an otherwise insignificant crime!

[alexia]

William Safire in today's NYT writes:
"The U.S. attorney has not accused her of the crime of insider trading. After a yearlong investigation, that central matter is nowhere in his indictment.

"Why not? Because he decided that would be too difficult a charge to persuade a jury to believe... " Instead, he left it to the SEC to pursue, where a lower burden of proof is required and the penalty is civil damages.

Safire (a conservative Libertarian, I believe) singles out the strange charge that Stewart behaved criminally when she publically denied the charges as the most troubling aspect of the case.

For his argument in full, see the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/12/opinion/12SAFI.html

[phoebe]

Thanks Alexia. This case just keeps getting stupider. And the administration hopes that we'll be naive and superficial enough to go along with the "mean people should be punished," junior high atmosphere it is fostering.

[holydiver]

Well they better take a good look in the mirror then lol..Ask Tony Blair how he is faring these days.