Martha Stewart sentenced to 5 months

[chicken]

Martha Stewart sentenced to five months in prison.

Make of that what you will. Original predictions were for 6-10 months, so she got off lightly. Also, due to the usual appeals process, her incarceration has been stayed.

Information on the appeals arguments.

Comments

[wickedprincess3.livejournal.com]

You know I was all almost sympathetic for her. Cause the menfolk do much worse and get away with it cause rich ass white men get away with everything and so the fact that Martha is the one that gets vilified annoyed.

I was. And then I read this..

"I ask that when you judge me, you remember all the good I've done."

Dude... did she feed starving orphans that I don't know about? Cause selling crappy towels and an unatainable image of homemaking isn't a public service in my universe.

[the-automatik.livejournal.com]

So are you saying you think she should get a worse sentence because of that comment?

I agree, she's a haughty bitch, but she wasn't on trial for that. Not from a strictly legal standpoint, at least.

Not trying to start a big flame war, it's an honest question.

[wickedprincess3.livejournal.com]

Ah sorry, should have been less snarky and more clear on my intent.
Not at all that she should get a worse sentence, very much did not mean that. I still think the media has been rather unfair to her when you consider the treatment that male CEO that commit the same crime get. Thus I do have sympathy or something. However, that comment made me boggle and have much less sympathy for the treatment she's received from the public at large.

So no. Being a bitch shouldn't get her more prison time at *all* it just gets her way less sympathy from me

[chicken-cem.livejournal.com]

Yep.

[the-automatik.livejournal.com]

Hehehe!

I agree, where is the media commenting on what Enron executives are wearing to their hearings? (Or have those even been scheduled yet?)

How do you feel about the whole "male powerful executives are go-getters; female powerful executives are bitches" debate?

[chicken-cem.livejournal.com]

I think putting non-violent people into prison is a waste of taxpayer money, myself. Whether or not a harsher sentence is warranted, the judge might have considered a larger fine instead of a prison sentence (but perhaps sentencing guidelines don't give judges too much leeway).

[the-automatik.livejournal.com]

I have only ever thought about this in terms of drug offenses, but it's an interesting point. What about someone like Ken Lay, though?

Or what about someone who doesn't commit an act of violence, but whose reckless endangerment has larger implications--like the doctor who watered down cancer drugs?

[chicken-cem.livejournal.com]

Obviously these things have to be taken on a case-by-case basis, but there are certainly some people in jail who shouldn't be there. For example, the famous case of the "three strikes" marijuana smokers who are in jail for a third simple possession violation (not selling, just possession).

[the-automatik.livejournal.com]

Oh that is totally ludicrous.

We need more money on drug treatment, not drug jails. I don't really see pot as a big threat, although I know several people who have allowed it to ruin their lives. But they shouldn't be in jail.

[chicken-cem.livejournal.com]

Not to get off on an enormous tangent, but really the vast majority of pot smokers do not need drug treatment, because for the vast majority, it is not addictive. (I found this to be personally true, smoking once a week or so for a few months and then stopping because it wasn't really a big deal either way.)

Of course there are also people who allow it to ruin their lives, just as they would probably also do with alcohol, for example (which is legal, and whose prohibition in the 1920s did not work). But you are corect, these people should not be in jail (unless, like a drunk driver, they kill someone while driving -- which the anti-pot lobbiests have taken a very few isolated cases of this and have made it seem in their TV ads as if all pot smokers automatically smoke, drive, & kill).

[the-automatik.livejournal.com]

Well, the person I'm thinking of has emotional issues and has taken many other drugs to try and deal with them. Pot seems to be the favorite, however. It's frustrating.

Your last line makes me think of the song "Drinking and Driving" by Black Flag, which I have always loved.

[chicken-cem.livejournal.com]

Don't know the song, but it does sound familiar.

[the-automatik.livejournal.com]

Make sure to tell yourself that this is cool.
And make sure to tell yourself that you have no choice.
And make sure to tell your friends that they drive you to it.
And that you can quit anytime that you want, anytime.
You can quit anytime that you want.
You can quit anytime.
You can quit anytime, anytime.

[chicken-cem.livejournal.com]

Plus, given the clear evidence outlined by the new appeals lawyer of perjury by witnesses, etc., it seems she may end up getting let completely off the hook (guilty or no) simply due to procedural errors, witnesses who lied, etc.

[the-automatik.livejournal.com]

It's scary when that happens to people who've actually committed serious crimes (I know of one person that had a few mistrials before being convicted of a pretty heinous murder).

[chicken-cem.livejournal.com]

Like say ... OJ Simpson? Grrr.

[the-automatik.livejournal.com]

No, a friend's uncle. He's supposed to up for parole soon. I hope to God he doesn't get out.

[chicken-cem.livejournal.com]

I agree -- the issue is unclear. On the one hand, people who are much more evil than she is, who are men, get away scot free. Like say, George Bush (whose oil company shenanigans are legion and well-documented if you read Molly Ivins). On the other hand, Martha is still quite wealthy and superior, and for her to take a 'poor me' attitude doesn't set a good role model and doesn't do any good to the public. If she had the good grace to be even a little contrite (yet still go rightfully to appeals court), people might respect her more.