Martha Stewart
>> joel androphy is a partner at berg & androphy and who says he was surprised by the verdict today. we’re going to get more insight from him now, visiting with us from houston. why so surprised? we were all surprised, but you’re a legal expert. why were you surprised?
>> i was surprised not from a legal point of view, but generally speaking the super rich have generally been privileged with regard to white collar criminal cases and obviously a message has been sent that this won’t be condoned at any different financial lev of wealth.
>> what do you think the broader message is, particularly for other high-profile, affluent, super rich to use your term defendants and names like enron and worldcom and bernard ebbers are popping into my mind, jeff skilling?
>> they have a severe problem. if martha stewart had been acquitted, it would have no effect at all because of the circumstances of her case but her case was so low down on the white collared toem―poetum -- totem pole, if a liberal new york jury could convict her, it sends a very strong message to people on trial in new york and throughout the rest of the country that live in generally more conservative communities.
>> when you look at the charges and you find the guilty on the four charges that martha stewart faces, facing up to five years in prison on each of the four counts, possibly 20 years, what do you think is realistic?
>> the sentencing guideline, what you’re speaking to are statutory prison terms but those are only paramet ters of what the judge should look at. the judge looked looks at a document called sentencing guidelines tailored more to the specific case of martha stewart. those guidelines come out with a range between 12 and 24 months of prison time.
>> the fact that she’s had -- maintained her innocence throughout the entire process, even her statement today, zero remorse, does that have any bearing whatsoever on a judge’s ultimate sentence that’s handed down?
>> the judge has some leeway of a couple of months in either direction. the judge does have some authority to lower the sentence two or three months or raise it two or three months but in general, the fact that she does not accept responsibility has very little bearing. martha stewart needs to take that approach now during the course of her appeal. she cannot give in. she has to be a very sturdy, on keel with regard to her innocence throughout the process.
>> is there any truth to the thought process, if you will, that federal judges take a very grim view of obstruction and perjury because they don’t like to see the government’s or their own time wasted?
>> you very rarely see these cases brought. judges don’t like these cases.
