I wanted to point something out that I thought was...an interesting dichotomy. As I am sure everyone is well aware by now, Martha Stewart was convicted on all four remaining charges on Friday. What I find interesting is that she was found guilty of four charges that were related directly to the main insider trading charge that the judge threw out because there was not enough evidence to support it.
Technically, that means that the the original charge doesn't exist--nothing criminal occurred in the eyes of the law. Yet, Stewart was found guilty of conspiracy and obstruction of justice in relation to the crime that the court feels there isn't enough evidence to prove she committed. So basically, she is guilty of conspiracy to commit nothing and obstructing the investigation of the same nothing.
Everybody knows she did it, I just wish the court system would recognize the fallacy of its own ruling here and either charge her with everything, or drop the charges for the crimes related to the main one; surely, if there was enough evidence to convict her of conspiring to commit insider trading and obstruction of justice, then the same evidence would have been enough to convict her of insider trading as well.
Just a thought.
While you are mulling that over, check out some of Tim's art and irreverant humor on his new website or his new blog.
Technically, that means that the the original charge doesn't exist--nothing criminal occurred in the eyes of the law. Yet, Stewart was found guilty of conspiracy and obstruction of justice in relation to the crime that the court feels there isn't enough evidence to prove she committed. So basically, she is guilty of conspiracy to commit nothing and obstructing the investigation of the same nothing.
Everybody knows she did it, I just wish the court system would recognize the fallacy of its own ruling here and either charge her with everything, or drop the charges for the crimes related to the main one; surely, if there was enough evidence to convict her of conspiring to commit insider trading and obstruction of justice, then the same evidence would have been enough to convict her of insider trading as well.
Just a thought.
While you are mulling that over, check out some of Tim's art and irreverant humor on his new website or his new blog.
Comments