Martha Stewart Has a Right to Her Attitude

Regarding Margaret Carlson’s March 3 commentary, which condemns Martha Stewart for her attitude, I ask, “What was her crime?” Although she may have lied to federal investigators about why she sold her ImClone shares, the sale of those shares was legal. Many people do not always tell the truth about why they do things, especially about the sale of stock. Assuming that she lied about her reason for selling, my guess is that she didn’t want to reveal that she sold on a tip from her broker, who was connected to her insider friend.

The tip was not instigated by that friend, nor was it solicited by Stewart. If she is guilty, she is guilty of human nature. When you are convicted in the manner she was, as Carlson so rightly notices, you have a right to have an attitude. Prosecuting her for such a crime, in my opinion, has done more harm than good. The government should have heeded the Mikado’s pronouncement that the punishment should fit the crime. Her future business activities will probably help her investors and employees as well as herself.

Leonard Kolod

Los Angeles