20 thoughts on “Most Definitely NOT a Good Thing…”

  5. This is outrageous. IMO in order to be convicted of tertiary, or related crimes? One should have to be convicted of the underlying claim. In this case insider trading.
    I really think our justice system has gone off the rails.

  6. spc67,
    Though I might tend to agree with you in certain cases, in this one I don’t have much sympathy for Martha. Former stockbroker herself, on the board of NYSE, and an officer of a publicly traded company. It was impossible for her to pretend she didn’t know what she was doing was unethical and illegal.

  7. It was impossible for her to pretend she didn’t know what she was doing was unethical and illegal.
    Yeah, I know. I just would much rather let criminals go than have our gov’t run amok. I think this is just one of many examples of our justice system running amok.

  8. ” I think this is just one of many examples of our justice system running amok.”
    Nah, 100 such cases is running amok. One high-profile case is just about right.
    Anyway, she is a Bush opponent, isn’t she? Howard Stern better watch his language.

  10. I have to agree with spc67, you should have to be convicted of an underlying crime.
    Though I agree in principle, where does the Al Capone tax evasion conviction fit in that concept?

  11. Tax evasion is an underlying crime — it wouldn’t have been wrong to punish Capone even if he were otherwise a legitimate businessman.
    Lying to a federal official about conduct legal in itself? Yes, it’s illegal, but there’s a very stron argument that it shouldn’t be.

  12. Though I agree in principle, where does the Al Capone tax evasion conviction fit in that concept?
    Good question. In Stewart’s case? The underlying crime should have been a requirement for a charge of say “obstruction of justice.” No underlying crime? Then how does one obstruct justice?
    In Capone’s case, it needn’t be proved that his income had been illeagally earned for him have committed a second, unrelated “underlying crime,” in this case income tax evasion. The crime of income tax evasion stood alone whether or not his underlying income was earned legally or not. Hence, no need to prove criminal activity in generating income, let alone murder, racketeering etc.

  13. I think my argument really struggles with the notion of “conspiracies” which are broken up before the actual crime is committed.

  14. “I just would much rather let criminals go than have our gov’t run amok”
    Oh, that quote’s going to come back and bite you in the ass. It’ll probably involve some snide remark about how Martha isn’t an Arab. But it won’t be me, no sirree.

  15. “The underlying crime should have been a requirement for a charge of say “obstruction of justice.”
    So bribing a witness or judge in a case where you have been found not guilty would fall under your scenario.

  16. Oh, that quote’s going to come back and bite you in the ass. It’ll probably involve some snide remark about how Martha isn’t an Arab. But it won’t be me, no sirree.
    My comment is clearly in the context of the US judicial system, not international politcs. Nice try though.
    So bribing a witness or judge in a case where you have been found not guilty would fall under your scenario.
    I don’t think so. Bribery is an “underlying crime” in itself. It’s not dependent on whether or not I was guilty of the crime of which I was accused. How the hell can you obstruct “justice” if justice is leaving the innocent alone and you’re innocent?

  17. And Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sexual harassment when there was no harassment.
    Or second degree, lying about his civil deposition to federal investigators
    You would think Martha was a Republican to hear these vigorous defenses

  18. And Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sexual harassment when there was no harassment.
    And NOT convicted.
    Or second degree, lying about his civil deposition to federal investigators
    Do you understand the difference between impeachment, a political act, and the criminal justice system?
    You would think Martha was a Republican to hear these vigorous defenses
    It’s called a principle.

  19. I know spc67. Half kidding. Ir isn’t among my most disappointing SCOTUS decisions, those are involve copyright extension, campaign finance, appointing a president
    but I am less comfortable with it than I sound.

Comments are closed.