Martha Stewart is not guilty. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. Martha Stewart is not guilty. You have heard the evidence, there is no need to rehash. But let us assume that she is guilty. What is the very worst that she has
done?
Prosecutor James Comey said that this case is about lying to investigators and to investors.
Prosecutor James Comey is absolutely right. If this government protected investors, Martha Stewart
would be free to protect their interests.
Martha Stewart was not truthful to investigators because they falsely claimed that she was guilty
of securities fraud. Having acted like it was a crime to receive a casual stock tip, Martha
Stewart lied because pompous Prosecutors who feed off the generosity of the Federal Government,
were threatening to destroy her life. Ms. Stewart is not a fool. A stockbroker in her earlier
life, Martha Stewart clearly understood the rules against insider trading, so when her stockbroker
called with a "great tip" she knew that it was possible to allege that she was committing
securities fraud by engaging in illegal insider trading and she naturally lied to avoid the
perception, and that is not a conspiracy.
If your broker at Merrill Lynch called you and told you that insiders in a stock you owned were
trying to sell their shares, what would you do? Would you be guilty of committing securities fraud
if you sold your shares? That is what the government would like to suggest and under these
circumstances, I would advise you to do whatever it takes, to protect yourself from the
conspiratorial rants that improperly threaten your life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Now I know that you people have absolutely no idea who Martha Stewart is. You have absolutely no
idea what it takes to be married to a billion dollar empire full of jobs and taxable income. You
have no idea that when Martha Stewart rejects the conspiratorial rants of the Federal Government,
her misdemeanor is about as significant as lying about sex. That is what Martha Stewart
essentially did, and if any of you think that you would advise your children to plead guilty to
committing securities fraud when they are innocent, then Martha Stewart's lies are criminally material. We live in
a world where perception is called reality, and who can blame Martha Stewart for lying about the
perception, to avoid the opportunity to promote a false reality? Make no mistake about it, that is
exactly what Martha Stewart did, and everybody knows it.
Martha Stewart is not being charged with insider trading because she is not guilty.
She is being charged with "obstruction of justice" and "conspiracy" because she refused to
corroborate the fantasies of the Federal Government. As the head of Martha Stewart
Living Omnimedia Martha Stewart does not even have time for her own family, let alone the bizarre, preposterous suggestion that she engaged a conspiracy to pocket a nickel.
Clearly, when law enforcement falsely claimed that Martha Stewart was guilty of fraudulent,
insider training, Martha Stewart was induced to lie, and that is called entrapment. That is
illegal, and if Martha Stewart is guilty for refusing to cooperate with corrupt Prosecutors, then
we need to re-write the law. In the meantime, Martha Stewart has not engaged in any behavior that
can even remotely be called a criminal offense.
The Wall Street Journal is the sternest of critics when it comes to the world of business, and to
quote directly:
If the Wall street Journal suggests that the prosecuting attorney is in fact the actual villain,
what makes you think that Martha Stewart is guilty of any criminal conduct? If you want to restore
faith in Wall Street, what makes you think that the Wall Street Journal does not?
Make no mistake about it, ladies and gentlemen, Martha Stewart is not guilty, and that is not a
matter of my opinion. It is a matter of the fact that you do not have the capacity to prove
otherwise.
A woman who employs thousands and generates taxable profits should be applauded, not condemned.
Unlike all the crooks who have milked small investors of billions of dollars and still enjoy their
freedom, Martha Stewart did not cook the books of her company, she did not treat Martha Stewart
Living Omnimedia as her personal piggy bank, she did not run her company into the ground, she did
not lie to shareholders, employees, analysts and pension fund managers, and she does not deserve
to be bullied by overreaching prosecutors. After all, apples are not oranges, and if prosecutors
do not recognize the difference between ordinary business dealings and criminal behavior, what
makes them think they deserve anybody's respect?
The Defense rests.
|
1/30/03 | DIVERTING BLAME | ||||||||||||
2/21/03 | EARLY REPORTS | ||||||||||||
3/16/03 | SUSPICIOUS MINDS | ||||||||||||
3/21/03 | AMBER FREY | ||||||||||||
4/04/03 | MEDIA SPIN | ||||||||||||
4/10/03 | SMOKING GUN? | ||||||||||||
3/16/03 | MARK GERAGOS | ||||||||||||
5/07/03 | TERRORIZING WITNESSES | ||||||||||||
9/23/03 | JAILHOUSE SNITCHES | ||||||||||||
10/20/03 | LARRY KING LIVE TAKEOVER | ||||||||||||
11/22/03 | CONNER PETERSON | ||||||||||||
01/14/04 | CENSORING THE TRUTH
02/06/04 |
THE REAL SCOOP | 02/16/04 |
VIVIAN MITCHELL DIES | 02/18/04 |
WHO IS FRAMING SCOTT | 10/22/04 |
JURY TAMPERING | CSI |
FORENSIC SCIENCE | |
SOLID ALIBI | |
Thanks for the message