• NiHaDuncan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Martha Stewart wasn’t actually convicted for insider trading, the judge threw that charge (securities fraud) out saying that no competent juror could find her guilty of it.

    I can’t remember if the true basis for dismissing the charge was lack of evidence or a judicial determination, but if it was the latter that’s pretty damning (that investigators didn’t have a case); as a determination of innocence presumes all evidence is factual, to a reasonable extent, and a determination of no crime having taken place does the same in concluding that the evidence describes no crime relating to the dismissed charge having taken place. A kind of legal non-sequitor.

    • ExtantHuman@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      She got the “tip” to sell from her own broker. The people who you would expect to get tips from. How was she supposed to know he had actual involvement with the company?