question about Martha S.

She is charged with "insider trading" of a public stock. That is illegal. Martha should know - she used to be a stockbroker. (The charge of defrauding investors in her own company was dismissed yesterday. That was a very weak charge that I'm surprised prosecutors ever brought. However, the insider trading charge remains and also carries serious penalties.)

As they say, "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime." Only time will tell if the jury finds her guilty.

Actually, she wasn't charged with insider trading. She was charged with obstruction of justice, making false statmentments, another charge related to covering up her alleged illegal stock transaction. In addition, she was charged with securities fraud because she proclaimed her innocence and that supposedly was an attempt to boost stock prices in her company (which she is a major stock holder.) Friday, the judge dismissed the securities fraud charge because "no reasonable juror could have convicted her." This is a case where the cover-up was worse than the crime. It also goes to show that being cooperative and making statements of any kind is often not in your best interest, even if you aren't guilty of a crime.

Actually, she wasn't charged with insider trading. She was charged with obstruction of justice, making false statements, another charge related to covering up her alleged illegal stock transaction. In addition, she was charged with securities fraud because she proclaimed her innocence and that supposedly was an attempt to boost stock prices in her company (which she is a major stock holder.) Friday, the judge dismissed the securities fraud charge because "no reasonable juror could have convicted her." This is a case where the cover-up was worse than the crime. It also goes to show that being cooperative and making statements of any kind is often not in your best interest, even if you aren't guilty of a crime.

The entire case appears to be a "case of persecution" rather than a "case of prosecution". I would hope that Martha Stewart is found innocent. Sad how you can NOT lie to the investigators...but they can lie all they want to you.

You deserve to be invested in WallStreet, up to the hilt. :-D

And we have since 1968. Over the entire history of the "stock market", growth has been stellar.

Although we don't have any Martha stock, WMT, LOW, and BUD have done pretty good.

Martha MSO deserves to be looking into. The stock was a good buy in 2002 and now has tripled. Personally, I am getting ready to dump HD.

Since i take all my finance advice from random usenet postings, I'm in full agreement.

YMMV! As with all investments, you can loose money.

Don't believe anything you read on this page, or, for that matter, anything you hear on The Internet, unless it is consistent with what you already know to be true, or unless you have taken the time to research the matter to prove it's accuracy to your satisfaction. This is known as "doing your homework." ©Neal Boortz

Gosh, Eric, isn't that kind of unnecessary when you get all those free OTC stock tips emailed to you by anonymous spammers?

Just posting in usenet occassionally should get you enough stock recommendations for a full portfolio plan.

Cheers, The Old Bear