Martha Stewart's Conspiracy

she knew her company Martha Stewart living Omni media would see a negative impact because it was associated with ImClone, so she sold some of her shares and because of that she was charged with manipulating the price of the stock of he own company. But by expressing her innocence that was charge was later thrown out (McGee, 2008). Ultimately she was guilty for everything, but the primary legal issues were from Stewarts conspiracy to defraud the investigators. The verdict, “ Martha Stewart was convicted of conspiracy and obstruction of justice in an insider trading case in 2004, and her punishment was five-months jail sentence, five-month house arrest two-year probation, and a $30,000 fine” (Source). Many believed her sentence was too lenient.
After the charges, the stock price of MSO went down by $6.72 and reduced down to the lowest of $6.32. Her product sale also suffered and the image of the brand was affected. Along with the stakeholder’s who suffered to a great extent. “ The major stake holders of the firm were MSO employees and the shareholders, the customers who were using products of the brand MSO. Kmart Corporation, competitors of MSO, the media outlasts and investing public. Also the scandal had occurred at an inconvenient time because the show’s ratings were declining, and the internet operations that were undertaken by the company were experiencing losses. The losses were equally experienced by all the division in her company” (assignmenthelp, 2013). But Martha did something that no one was expecting; she resigned from her position as the CEO of the firm. The Ethics of Martha Stewart There were many mixed feelings, as one on MSNBC said, “ If her name was Martha Smith, this never would have come to trial” implying that Martha was unfairly targeted.
They believed they were out to get her because she was a celebrity. If it was anyone else, they would either let it go or they would have punished them more. According to other researchers and prosecutors, they believed Martha got lucky. “it has been realized that a celebrity, a wealthy business person, or a political leader can get off more easily and die to their ability to pay the jail-out, they usually od not get the suffering they should feel and deserve in the prison life, instead they pay the find demanded and exchange in small stiff cell bed in jail for a $10,000 cushion at the privacy and safety of their own home while watching their favorite TV show and having an expensive snack” (source). Martha was able to pay her out because she had the money Bututs argued that it is not fair, because poorer people couldn’t afford nearly as much as Ms. Stewart. It makes sense though. As Robert Blakc (Barreta) use to say, “Don’t od the crime, if you can’t do the time.” Everyone, rich or poor, should pay the same amount and jail time should be the
same. Is it wrong to be Rich? Since the beginning of time, the rich have always been an easy target.
The ethical presumption is that they believe money is above everything because well that’s why they are rich. “And if they value money above all, then the rich must be unethical and bad people, because the pursuit of wealth is not on anyone’s list of moral or ethical values” (Ethics). In this case of Martha Stewart, it wasn’t about becoming rich, but breaking the law to become richer. We think about poor people stealing bread for their family, but rich people are generally unethical because they try to get away, knowing that they can pay the
price. In general, Martha Stewart got it easy, considering it was series crime. She was later attacked by the media, by many people and even many fans. Many fans would wait outside the courtroom where many kept growing against her. When looking at the overall picture, the media has hurt Martha Stewart negativity.