Martha Stewart Fraud Case
In 2003, Martha Stewart was facing prison time and her empire in domestic art was at risk because of “nine-count federal indictment” which she was charge will “perjury and conspiracy” because of a “high profile stock trading scandal” (Hurtado, N. P. (n.d.). James Comey, a U.S. Attorney, said that “she brought trouble on herself and her company by lying to her shareholders and investors in an attempt to cover her tracks and keep her stock from plummeting” (Hurtado, N. P. (n.d.). Comey believe that the criminal case was all about lying and he said that Martha is being prosecuted for what she did and not who she is. When she went to court she plead not guilty. Stewart was also charge with “securities fraud stemming” (Hurtado, N. P. (n.d.).,
which happen 2002 when she tried to “halt the erosion of her company’s stock caused by investor concerns over the burgeoning scandal”. Stewart lawyer said she was “unfairly prosecuted” (Hurtado, N. P. (n.d.). because of her being a celebrity or her high profile. Her lawyer said that the government was taking the attention away from the first white collar crime and they want her because she was a successful business woman. Stewart during this time was facing up to 30 years in prison and facing fine up to 1.25 million dollars and she had a better change to have faced less time than that if she was convicted on all counts.
I believe that the behavior was very strong as far as charging and convicting a high profile person and not giving Martha Stewart any leniency because she was a celebrity in the business world. She got punishment for what she was charge for and she serve her time and now she is out. I believe that this is ethical under deontology because she was lying to the investor, FBI, and etc. so it was the court’s obligation to charge her and found her guilty and sentence her. She didn’t serve 30 years but she did her time and she probably learned from her mistakes and she is doing well for her now after this happen. This is criminal justice related because it’s dealing with fraud and lying about not doing a white collar crime.
which happen 2002 when she tried to “halt the erosion of her company’s stock caused by investor concerns over the burgeoning scandal”. Stewart lawyer said she was “unfairly prosecuted” (Hurtado, N. P. (n.d.). because of her being a celebrity or her high profile. Her lawyer said that the government was taking the attention away from the first white collar crime and they want her because she was a successful business woman. Stewart during this time was facing up to 30 years in prison and facing fine up to 1.25 million dollars and she had a better change to have faced less time than that if she was convicted on all counts.
I believe that the behavior was very strong as far as charging and convicting a high profile person and not giving Martha Stewart any leniency because she was a celebrity in the business world. She got punishment for what she was charge for and she serve her time and now she is out. I believe that this is ethical under deontology because she was lying to the investor, FBI, and etc. so it was the court’s obligation to charge her and found her guilty and sentence her. She didn’t serve 30 years but she did her time and she probably learned from her mistakes and she is doing well for her now after this happen. This is criminal justice related because it’s dealing with fraud and lying about not doing a white collar crime.