I-Mockery Forum - Reply to Topic

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options Automatically parse links in text

Mar 8th, 2004 12:50 AM

Helm

Quote:

legal positivism

Shouldn't that be legal utilitarianism or somesort? Whatever. I vote for more sodomy.

Mar 7th, 2004 09:43 PM

punkgrrrlie10

actually "proven" guilty means just that, it was proved and the jury found that to be so. Now if you mean "actual" guilt that's different...but you're a dumb ass so you probably didn't meant that.

Mar 7th, 2004 09:11 PM

The One and Only...

Having a jury hand down a guilty verdict is not the same as being proven guilty.

Mar 7th, 2004 07:47 PM

mburbank

Yes, well, but, oh, this one philsopher who you dopn't know about said it best in a language I'm sure you don't speak, and, uh, what I meant was several terms I bet you don't know the meaning of. Also, my mom? Says I'm special and you all disagree with me and put me down 'cause your jealous.
-Me, saving OAO the trouble.

Mar 7th, 2004 06:49 PM

punkgrrrlie10

Quote:

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

Quote:

Originally Posted by punkgrrrlie10

Perjury is a crime. One and Only, just so you understand...LYING to law enforcement and the SEC is a crime in any jurisdiction in the country, especially the federal one.

You do realize that she wasn't actually proven guilty, right? To be honest, there shouldn't have been any conviction - there wasn't enough evidence. There's a reason why all the lawyers were saying that Martha would walk.

And Pern, legal positivism is barely even a coherent position anymore.

You obviously have no concept of how the jury system works in the country. When the jury finds you guilty, that means she was actually proven guilty. That whole presumption of innocence applies until a trial, which a jury sits and hears and then they decide whether she's guilty or not. They say "we find the defendant guilty as charged your honor" and that is considered proven guilty. Obviously there was enough evidence of the perjury charge b/c the judge didn't drop those charges yet dropped the insider trading charges for lack of evidence.

Mar 6th, 2004 02:36 PM

mesobe

well now instead of glueing pinecones to styofoam balls, she will be making shaking knifes from toothbrushes.

Mar 6th, 2004 02:16 PM

imported_Hollycaust

oh i hope you all perish into your filthy lifestyles now that martha is RIP =.(

Mar 6th, 2004 12:16 PM

The One and Only...

Quote:

Originally Posted by punkgrrrlie10

Perjury is a crime. One and Only, just so you understand...LYING to law enforcement and the SEC is a crime in any jurisdiction in the country, especially the federal one.

Mar 6th, 2004 11:02 AM

El Blanco

Quote:

Originally Posted by mburbank

So how come her sentencing isn't till june and guys who rob liquor stores get hauled out of court in handcuffs as soon as the verdict comes in?

She didn't have anyone at gun point, which means she isn't a violent felon. And she has a better lawyer.

The fucked up thing is, she is just a pelt for the investigators to hang up. The guy who comitted the bigger offenses(Skilling) and deserves more jailtime is pleading out so the prosecutor can make a name.

I'm not trying to defend her here. She deserves the 20, but why is the guy who pretty much masterminded the deal getting a slap on the wrist?

Mar 6th, 2004 04:15 AM

Big Papa Goat

So... are you the new OAO yet?

Mar 6th, 2004 02:58 AM

Brandon

Well, putting the obstruction of justice charges aside, should insider trading really be considered a crime? If Martha was tipped by a broker with information that the executives were rapidly selling stock, what should she have done in such a situation? Should she have just held on to her stocks, knowing full well that they would soon plummet?

EDIT: By the way, it bothers me that people on the far left have an almost knee-jerk hatred of everyone in the corporate world. Come to think of it, they seem to have a knee-jerk hatred of the wealthy in general.

Mar 6th, 2004 12:09 AM

Bobo Adobo

They should send to a federal "pound me in the ass" prison for 20 years, the max sentence. Make her an example to all these rich fucks that try to screw with the system to make their greedy asses wealthier. To me I think her crime is just as morally bad as a bank robbers.

I just heard some comedian on T.V. say she will be the first inmate to give a gaurd a blowjob for some potpourri.

Mar 6th, 2004 12:01 AM

Jeanette X

Martha Stewart doesn't live very far from me. Although I've never had the dubious honor of meeting her, people I know have, and by all accounts, she's an arrogant, obnoxious, screamy bitch. I say let her rot in jail.

Mar 5th, 2004 10:50 PM

punkgrrrlie10

she wasn't convicted of securities fraud, that charge was dropped for insufficiency of evidence. She was convicted of obstruction, perjury, false stmts.

Quote:

That, and Martha isn't guilty of any real crime.

Perjury is a crime. One and Only, just so you understand...LYING to law enforcement and the SEC is a crime in any jurisdiction in the country, especially the federal one.

Mar 5th, 2004 10:19 PM

theapportioner

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtificialBrandon

I'm not going to get into what I think of insider trading laws here, but I'll just say that I think the severity of Martha's sentence is utterly absurd. What's even worse is a smug juror jubilantly proclaiming that the decision was a "victory for the little guy."

And by the way: who wants to bet that Skilling walks?

Insider trading penalties are generally harsh - Martha is no exception.

I think it's fair. All of the owners (stockholders) of a publicly owned company should have fair and equal access to information that positively or negatively impacts their company. Also, those who are on the inside (CEOs etc.) would have less of an incentive for seeing their company do well if they can sell stock before bad news is made public, and make money at the expense of others. The harsh penalties are intended to deter.

Mar 5th, 2004 09:56 PM

Brandon

Mar 5th, 2004 09:20 PM

Stabby

What she did isn't that big of a deal. She's guilty I guess so than she should be punished, but maybe it's time to focus on the Haliburtons and other coprorations who are doing much, much worse things than lying about getting a stock tip.

Mar 5th, 2004 07:34 PM

Perndog

Quote:

Originally Posted by Helm

Perndog, you are speaking out of your ass. To remove the moral aspect of a law is absurd.

Quote:

Crime is crime because it's illegal

That's like 8 years old mentality. And for a self-proclaimed Satanist it's especially sad. How and why did it become illegal? The origin is the whole concept of legality is inherently moral.

Okay, now that I have an intelligent audience, I'll be a little more reasonable.

Crime is crime because it is a hindrance to society. The rules are put in place 1) because of the morals of the lawmakers but more importantly 2) so people will get along.

Is that better?

EDIT: The source of the laws isn't what's important anyway. My original point: she deserves punishment because she knew the laws existed and she broke them anyway. If you don't like the rules you're better off getting them changed or moving someplace with different rules.

Mar 5th, 2004 07:24 PM

AChimp

HE MEANS IT, FOLKS!

Mar 5th, 2004 07:16 PM

davinxtk

I'd come up with a witty retort, simian, but I am in dire need of a nap. Simply following your request will have to suffice.

Edit: For the record I'd like to contest that I do contribute more than aesthetics around here. I post more in this forum than any of the others.

Except, of course, "The Post Your Picture Here Thread".

Mar 5th, 2004 07:10 PM

AChimp

Quick, davin! Show us your pouty face!

Mar 5th, 2004 07:08 PM

davinxtk

Why does anyone care about this kind of shit?
There's better stuff to be worrying about right now. This is just morbid curiosity on the screaming death of an icon, nobody cares about the actual offense.

Mar 5th, 2004 07:08 PM

Helm

Perndog, you are speaking out of your ass. To remove the moral aspect of a law is absurd.

Quote:

Crime is crime because it's illegal

That's like 8 years old mentality. And for a self-proclaimed Satanist it's especially sad. How and why did it become illegal? The origin is the whole concept of legality is inherently moral.

Mar 5th, 2004 07:03 PM

theapportioner

Quote:

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

You honestly believe that making stock trades with those who lack the same amount of knowledge that you do is morally wrong?

Why don't you just shut down Wall Street? Or the entire capitalist system?

Apples and oranges.

Mar 5th, 2004 06:55 PM

Perndog

Quote:

Originally Posted by The One and Only...

Dumbass. Crime is crime because it's illegal. You know, like written down state and federal laws. While lots of people will tell you it's morally wrong, too, you don't need to bring this morality bullshit into the issue. What she did was illegal and therefore deserving of punishment until the law is changed or overturned.

This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

About Us |

Store |

Advertising |

Contact

Features

Shorts

Editorials

Games

Comics

Blogs

Forum

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads You may post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts vB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off