Martha Stewart defended

Softening his former view of the Martha Stewart affair, Stephen Bainbridge suggests that the government may be overreaching in prosecuting Stewart for publicly denying a charge of insider trading when it does not see fit to charge her with insider trading itself (Oct. 7; Oct. 8; Oct. 9; Oct. 10; Oct. 14; and follow links […]

Softening his former view of the Martha Stewart affair, Stephen Bainbridge suggests that the government may be overreaching in prosecuting Stewart for publicly denying a charge of insider trading when it does not see fit to charge her with insider trading itself (Oct. 7; Oct. 8; Oct. 9; Oct. 10; Oct. 14; and follow links from the various entries). See also Reason’s recent cover story with its unnecessarily provocative title and subhead (Michael McMenamin, “St. Martha”, Oct.). Other views: Yin Blog, Oct. 8: Daily Kos, Jun. 5; Chris Byron, “$uper Winter Sale for Martha Stewart”, New York Post/Fox News, Jun. 11. Update Jan. 27 (trial).

Comments are closed.