Newsweek has a thumbnail analysis of the case:
- Martha Stewart's high-powered defense team got it wrong. They assumed prosecutors failed to make their case, and put up no defense. Here's what happened:
Codefendant: PETER BACANOVIC
His lawyers did more harm than good for Martha. Every witness they called seemed to turn against them and ended up backing the prosecution. Oops.
The Defense: ROBERT MORVILLO
Martha's blue-chip defense attorney gambled by not putting Martha on the stand. A juror said later that they wanted to hear her side.
The Prosecutor: KAREN PATTON SEYMOUR
She kept the case simple, focusing on basic facts and not celebrity. Plus, her low-key manner and slight Texas twang were a good casting call against the stone-silent Martha.
The Assistant: ANN ARMSTRONG
Jurors say Armstrong was the most damaging witness because she was real. She loved her boss (and her plum pudding) and recounted the moment when Martha knew she had done wrong.
The Judge: MIRIAM GOLDMAN CEDARBAUM
Her attention to detail and schoolmarm bearing kept the lawyers in line even during some of the raucous days of the trial. Since day one she said the government had a strong case, and she called it.
- the lasting impact of the Stewart case may be that it will become the new standard for judging all fat cats who don't play by the rules. "We're now going to see the 'Martha test' as a fair punishment for white-collar crimes," says Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, associate dean of the Yale School of Management. "This is going to have a strong influence on jurors from here on out."
Her prospects?
- Martha's appeal is a long shot, since her attorneys must prove that the judge made serious errors. And Judge Miriam Cedarbaum actually ruled in favor of the defense most of the time, including dismissing the government's most serious charge against Stewart. Perhaps the cruelest penalty for Martha is the prospect of being cast out of the $250 million company she built from scratch. As a convicted felon, Martha faces a lifetime ban from serving as an executive or a director of a public company.
....Martha now has time to reflect on what went wrong. For starters, she admits she wishes she had not returned her broker's call on Dec. 27, 2001, while jetting off to vacation at the exclusive Las Ventanas resort in Mexico. Martha made that admission not on the witness stand, but to Barbara Walters two months before the trial. Martha never took the stand in her own defense, a risky strategy that legal experts say was probably based on the diva's volatility and the inconsistencies in her story. Another risk: if the judge believed Stewart lied on the stand, she could have doubled her prison sentence. Still, juries like to hear from celebrity defendants. "I would have loved to have heard the other side of the story," says juror Hartridge.
Article comments