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:

With regard to the now-dismissed securities fraud charge, it's worth noting that ever since the feds intervened to "protect" Miss Stewart's shareholders, their stock has been languishing. On the news Friday that the albatross had been lifted, these holders watched their stock rise nearly 11%, closing at a level it hadn't seen since June 2002. Which begs the question: Who hurt the shareholders of Martha Stewart Living more: Martha, or the prosecuting U.S. Attorney? The market's already given its answer.

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?

http://skakel.tripod.com/martha.htm