Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Biomaven who wrote (8610)	6/5/2003 12:05:36 PM
From: Harold Engstrom	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

>>Martha is being prosecuted mainly for the cover-up<< As a former NYSE board member she should be ashamed and deserves prosecution. That there are plenty of other even more deserving of justice does not mean that Ms. Stewart should not be held to the high standards demanded by her current and former positions. Further on the gossip front: is anyone else disgusted by the publicity surrounding HRC's account of her years in the whitehouse? Airing her family's dirty laundry for a few dollars shows no integrity and dirt poor values.

To: Biomaven who wrote (8610)	6/5/2003 12:22:10 PM
From: Ian@SI	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

OT Note also that Martha is being prosecuted mainly for the cover-up - it always amazes me that people just don't learn. So far, Justice hasn't charged her with Insider Trading - probably because they knew they wouldn't get a conviction. And the SEC probably won't win their civil case if the legal pundits who understand the LEGAL definition of Insider Trading are to be believed. So, if there was no crime, can Martha really be found guilty of covering up "something"? Or is it now unlawful to have an offensive personality? ;-) Ian