Paging through some of the arm-chair analysis of Martha Stewart's legal defense, which led to conviction on 'all counts', it takes some attentive reading to realize that 'all counts' includes just the cover-up (conspiracy, obstruction of justice and two counts of lying to investigators) of her alleged misconduct.
It's only at the nineteenth paragraph of this article that we are informed that the underlying charge of Securities Fraud had already been dismissed:
Morvillo and his partners at the trial, John J. Tigue and John Cuti, scored a huge victory for Stewart on Feb. 27 -- persuading U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum to drop a (THE would be more appropriate - ed.) charge of securities fraud against Stewart.So what does this all mean? It means that the lessons of Nixon, Clinton, and many other shame-faced accused are seldom learned: The cover-up is almost always worse than the crime.
Legal experts said Stewart might have avoided prison if she had come clean then because the money at stake in the trade was so small. Stewart, who was briefly a billionaire after Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia went public in 1999, saved $51,000 by selling a day ahead of a damaging government report about an ImClone drug.So, instead of making curtains for her TV show, Martha will now be making them for her prison cell. Then again, there may be a way for Martha to turn lemons into lemonade:
"Had she admitted the mistake early on, she would have spent no time in prison," said Ajamie, who was careful to point out he was speaking in hindsight. "She's much worse off than had she tried to go in and just admit the mistake."
Next on Prison Living with Martha Stewart, Ken Lay shows us how to BBQ your balance sheet Texas Style.
I'd tune in for Dick Cheney's guest appearance, wouldn't you?