Post by: garyk/nm on March 04, 2005, 02:21:05 AM
Post by: Greg L on March 04, 2005, 02:23:31 AM
Greg (breathlessly waiting for the next Michael Jackson update
)
Post by: jamz on March 04, 2005, 02:58:08 AM
Post by: MaterDei on March 04, 2005, 04:25:07 AM
That couch smiley is funny and very appropriately used.
Post by: Wildalaska on March 04, 2005, 01:24:49 PM
WildandherproductsareoverpricedAlaska
Post by: Schuey2002 on March 04, 2005, 01:38:30 PM
Yep, yuppie white collar crime does pay, I guess..
Post by: Holly76201 on March 04, 2005, 03:05:02 PM
Maybe I'm just too old {almost 50} but I remember when anyone who had been to prison was embarrassed and most folks avoided them or at least didn't treat them as some kind of "special case".
Who's with me?
Post by: Chuck Jennings on March 04, 2005, 06:59:49 PM
Post by: Wildalaska on March 04, 2005, 09:11:47 PM
Quote
his was one heck of an example of political prosecution. It seems that they made Martha a target, and were determined to get her no matter what. In the end, she was convicted of claiming to be innocent of a crime that she was never charged with.
Jury didnt think so........
WildguiltyguiltyguiltyAlaska
Post by: wasrjoe on March 04, 2005, 09:14:52 PM
Quote
This was one heck of an example of political prosecution. It seems that they made Martha a target, and were determined to get her no matter what. In the end, she was convicted of claiming to be innocent of a crime that she was never charged with.
How are you so sure of this?
Post by: Chuck Jennings on March 04, 2005, 10:12:58 PM
The criminal charges leveled against her was securities fraud. The SEC said that she lied when she denied engaging in insider trading to the press in order to inflate the stock price, but couldn't prove she was lying. So, she was convicted of denying that she was involved in insider trading even though she was never even charged with the offense.
In this situation, a jury verdict is not persuasive for me, as many of the jurors interviewed after the verdict had a lot of things to say about "arrogance" and "victory for the little guy over the bigwigs." There was not much talk of the finding of fact.
Never mind the fact that "insider trading" is a nebulous concept to which the SEC has taken the "we know it when we see it" aprroach rather than clearly defining it.
This case has shown what many of us know. If the gov't wants to get you, they will.
Post by: Gewehr98 on March 10, 2005, 01:53:32 PM
Martha played the role of the man or woman in the relationship with her cellmate. :?
Post by: Schuey2002 on March 10, 2005, 02:11:56 PM
It makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Post by: Gewehr98 on March 10, 2005, 02:13:36 PM
(I'd make her my b**ch...)
Post by: Chuck Jennings on March 10, 2005, 04:22:19 PM
http://www.inlocoveritas.com/headline3.htm
Post by: Bruce H on March 12, 2005, 12:59:49 PM
Ken Lay should get the death penalty for lying to everybody. Marthas was a farce and i can't stand her. There are several eligible candidates for court appearances that haven't happened yet. The Worldcom jury sounds like twelve brain sergeons also.
Post by: Unisaw on March 12, 2005, 01:12:24 PM
Post by: Rico567 on March 13, 2005, 08:40:42 AM
As far as all the entertainment and hoopla, folks, look around....what isn't? Alistair Cooke, one of my favorite commentators on the United States, probably the greatest since Alexis de Tocqueville, who passed away this past year, was asked around 30 years ago what he liked about the U.S. (He became a citizen around the time of WWII.) He had a pretty good list, including jazz music, etc. He was then asked what he believed to be the greatest flaw of the U.S. He replied "The love of show; the growing tendency to prefer style over substance." At the time, I was still young & dumb enough not to grasp what he was saying. Now, it's so much a part of the wallpaper of our daily existence we hardly notice....