Martha Stewart calls lockdown 'hideous' ("M-Diddy" Stewart whine Alert!)

Bakersfield Californian ^ | 7/5/05 | AP

[NormsRevenge]

NEW YORK (AP) - Martha Stewart says in a new interview that her nickname in prison was M. Diddy, that house arrest is "hideous" and that her prosecution was about bringing her down "to scare other people."

In the interview, Stewart tells Vanity Fair magazine she agrees with those who say her crime - lying about a personal stock sale - is far different from massive corporate scandals such as Enron, WorldCom and Tyco.

"Of course that is what it's all about," Vanity Fair quotes Stewart as saying. "Bring 'em down a notch, to scare other people. If Martha can be sent to jail, think hard before you sell that stock."

Stewart, 63, is serving a five-month term of house arrest at her Bedford, N.Y., estate that followed five months in a West Virginia federal prison. She is scheduled to go free early next month.

"I hate lockdown. It's hideous," Stewart tells the August issue of the magazine, on newsstands July 12.

Asked about the electronic monitoring device she must wear on her ankle - she has complained repeatedly that it irritates her skin - Stewart says she knows how to remove it.

"I watched them put it on. You can figure out how to get it off," she is quoted as saying. "It's on the Internet. I looked it up."

Her publicist's eyes "widened with alarm" when Stewart made the remark. The article didn't say whether Stewart claimed ever to have taken off the device.

Still, Stewart appears to take house arrest very seriously, noting that she once phoned her probation officer to apologize when she arrived home two or three minutes late from an approved outing.

Stewart has two TV shows planned for the fall season - a one-hour daytime talk show "Martha" and a version of the NBC reality show "The Apprentice."

She says her version of "The Apprentice" will be different than Donald Trump's and that she doesn't want to be portrayed as mean and harsh. She says she would never use Trump's catchphrase, "You're fired."

"We are trying to come up with other ways to say it," she says. "For instance, if someone is from Idaho, I could say, 'You're back in Boise for apple-picking time.'"

A federal appeals court is considering Stewart's bid to overturn her conviction on charges that she lied about her sale of 3,928 shares of ImClone Systems stock in late 2001.

Asked whether she owes anyone an apology, Stewart says she is sorry for the "chaos" her prosecution caused but suggests she is not personally to blame.

"You can't be sorry for something that - let's see, how can I say this? I'm on appeal. You don't appeal if you think that you should be sorry," she says.

The magazine reports Stewart is in good spirits and hard at work renovating her Bedford home. She is allowed to leave Bedford 48 hours per week for work outings.

She even laughs at a joke made by Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" - that she could make a shiv, or small blade, out of a lamb shank.

"He was talking about me after I left, and - I have to say - Jon Stewart is even better looking in person than he is on TV," Stewart says. "I have such a crush on him."

[NormsRevenge]

Martha Stewart speaks to reporters at her home in Katonah, N.Y. in this Friday, March 4, 2005 file photo. Stewart says in a new interview with Vanity Fair Magazine that her nickname in prison was M. Diddy, that house arrest is 'hideous' and that her prosecution was about bringing her down 'to scare other people.' In the interview, Stewart tells the magazine she agrees with those who say her crime _ lying about a personal stock sale _ is far different from massive corporate scandals like Enron, WorldCom and Tyco. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano, FILE)

[Dog]

Asked about the electronic monitoring device she must wear on her ankle - she has complained repeatedly that it irritates her skin - Stewart says she knows how to remove it.

"I watched them put it on. You can figure out how to get it off," she is quoted as saying. "It's on the Internet. I looked it up."

Her publicist's eyes "widened with alarm" when Stewart made the remark.

Uh oh..she isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer is she.

LOL!

[Paul Atreides]

I literally thought that she was going to mention the VRWC.

[Dog]

Nah.... she was to busy telling the feds she removes her ankle bracelet.....she looked it up on the internet doncha know.

ROFL!

[dsmatuska]

"Of course that is what it's all about," Vanity Fair quotes Stewart as saying. "Bring 'em down a notch, to scare other people. If Martha can be sent to jail, think hard before you sell that stock."

How about think hard before you lie on the witness stand?

[You Dirty Rats]

Martha is convicted and sent to prison; OJ and Jacko were set free.

If I was Martha Stewart, I'd be bitter too.

[Billthedrill]

"For instance, if someone is from Idaho, I could say, 'You're back in Boise for apple-picking time.'"

Uh-huh. Mostly they don't pick apples in Boise, Martha. They pick potatoes. Gives ya strong fingers...

[Paul Atreides]

Give her time. She'll probably spout off about looking up the Downing Street memo, on the 'net.

[Moonman62]

Martha Stewart says in a new interview that her nickname in prison was M. Diddy, that house arrest is "hideous" and that her prosecution was about bringing her down "to scare other people."

Wrong. The feds went after her to take the heat off the incumbents for the bad economy during the 2002 midterm elections.

[MadelineZapeezda]

Martha was guilty and went to jail. But her house arrest is hideous.

Wacko Jacko perv was sleeping with kids and showing them porn and he walks. OJ walked. Robert Blake walked. Doesn't seem fair.

[airborne]

Martha should have made the call to her broker from California! ;^)

[azhenfud]

Same sentiment shared here.

[Oztrich Boy]

"Of course that is what it's all about," Vanity Fair quotes Stewart as saying. "Bring 'em down a notch, to scare other people. If Martha can be sent to jail, think hard before you sell that stock."

I'm sure every Johnny Lunchpail and Sally Housecoat has been intimidated in their insider stock-trading by what happened to Martha.

[sharktrager]

She is so wrong.

Her prosecution was just to get her off my damn TV, and it worked!

Damned If I Know

[Tennessee_Bob]

I could say, 'You're back in Boise for apple-picking time.'"

And that's a good thing...

[Spok]

"that house arrest is "hideous" and that her prosecution was about bringing her down "to scare other people."

It's called 'punishment', and yes, one purpose is to deter others. Her comments sound more like Jessica Simpson than someone with an education.

[2001convSVT]

Do you or any other freepers have any idea if Martha has changed her political leanings, considering that it was her Northeast liberal "friends" that took her down?

[Smogger]

She didn't lie on a witness stand. Are you familiar at all with the case?

[Smogger]

"Bring 'em down a notch, to scare other people."

Absolutely that was their intention. Not to mention you can make a name for yourself as a politically ambitious prosecutor (and face it what prosoector's aren't politically ambitious?)

Instant name recognition when he decide's to run. "Oh! he's the guy who took Martha Stewart down"

[OldFriend]

She was on trial for lying to federal investigators.

She could have taken the fifth amendment or simply told the truth but she chose to lie.

She would love people to think it was about selling stock.

[drama queen]

While you should always obey the law it has become time to re-examine "insider trading laws" and laws in general to see how the government is attempting to micromanage our lives, like with the "Bank Secrecy Act" where you cannot loan a friend in need anything over $10,000 without the bank reporting your "suspicious" action to the feds.

O.J. Simpson and Robert Blake never went to prison whereas Martha Stewart did. I think her prosecution was a big waste of time.

[sgtbono2002]

In her mind Martha is a victim, a martyr, why disillusion her with facts. Her kind never liked facts.

[Redbob]

"How about think hard before you lie on the witness stand?"

Is that anything like, "Think hard before you make ridiculous remarks"?

Martha never lied on the witness stand.
She merely lied in an interview(s), not under oath, not in a courtroom.

So the feds, knowing they couldn't make a case against her for insider trading, decided to charge her with lying to them.

[hosepipe]

Camp Cupcake was not lock down and house arrest in a mansion would be a step up for most of us..

BUZZZZ... times up Martha.. you're irrelevant.. and arrogant..

[John Lenin]

I'll trade places with you any day of the week Martha.

[billbears]

As much in the past as I have had disdain for Martha Stewart, I don't see where she did anything all that wrong.

[weaponeer]

How about think hard before you lie on the witness stand?

She never lied on the witness stand. (Like Clinton did.) That would have been perjury. She was never charged with perjury. She was charged with lying to a Federal Official. Not under oath or in a deposition or such. All you have to do to be charged with a Federal Felony is say something to a Fed that isn't true. Look up 18 USC 1001.

[atomic_dog]

"Of course that is what it's all about," Vanity Fair quotes Stewart as saying. "Bring 'em down a notch, to scare other people ...

Bzzzzzzzzzzt! Wrong answer but thanks for playing Martha!

You have learned nothing from all of this. It is all about when the LEO's (Law Enforcement Officers) come you say nothing and lawyer up. Had you done that, the worst that could have happened was that you might have had to disgorge (pay the government) the money you made on the transaction.

Not only that but you're double stupid as, having been an officer of a company that went public, I know that this was explained to you in detail by the underwriters lawyers when you went public.

[atomic_dog]

All you have to do to be charged with a Federal Felony is say something to a Fed that isn't true. Look up 18 USC 1001.

The absolutely ridiculous thing about that law is that the Feds can lie to you when they ask the questions. They allegedly did this to Martha. At least the playing field should be leveled and lying should be allowed if the Feds do it first.

[Rifleman]

She did not lie under oath. She was convicted of lieing to some federal investigators about an act which was not itself a crime (she was not an "insider" so could not be guilty of insider trading).

This was a travesty and Stewart is exactly right that it is all about putting fear in the hearts of the subjects.

Never, ever talk to investigators especially federal. They are not your friends. No matter whether you are innocent or guilty. At one time it could be considered a civil duty to cooperate with the authorities. No more.

[garyhope]

She seems to have forgotten about arrogance, hubris and insider trading. And she risked so much for so comparatively little compared to her net worth.

But yes, there worse and more egregious crimes and criminals out there. A certain Hildabeast and hubby come to mind.

[sitetest]

Dear garyhope,

"She seems to have forgotten about arrogance, hubris and insider trading."

As others have pointed out, she wasn't prosecuted for insider trading.

Arrogance and hubris, although not to be cultivated, are not federal crimes.


sitetest

[em2vn]

She was convicted of lying to investigators about a crime for which she couldn't be prosecuted.

[geezerwheezer]

Martha is the modern Leona Helmsley. She got caught up in her own little web of funny monies, stock trading on the QT from a "family friend", etc. Is it my fault that the dummy got caught trying to cover her ample a$$ with little "stretches of imagination" a.k.a. LIES, and had to spend time in the slammer and then in her really quaint cottage? I say, you slept with the dogs Martha, and you got the fleas from it. Deal with it and STFU! She definitely ain't the brightest bulb in that candelabra, is she?

[William Tell]

Redbob said: "So the feds, knowing they couldn't make a case against her for insider trading, decided to charge her with lying to them."

Since Waksal, who is serving seven years, I believe, was the "insider" it only makes sense that Martha was not going to be charged for "insider trading".

What is pretty obvious is that Martha gained I think fifty thousand dollars by selling stock to investors who would have had no idea that the stock price was going to plummet the next day because of information that Waksal had and Stewart probably heard. You can believe that Stewart only made that money by accident but I don't. If a person expects to make such gains by accident then they need to be up front about what they knew and when they knew it. I wish that you had been the one to buy the stock from Stewart. You might have a different appreciation for the laws intended to protect investors.

You don't believe that Waksal was innocent of wrong-doing, do you?

[mountaineer]

Stewart tells Vanity Fair magazine she agrees with those who say her crime - lying about a personal stock sale - is far different from massive corporate scandals such as Enron, WorldCom and Tyco.

No one said what she did was the equivalent of the "massive corporate scandals," that's why different crimes warrant different penalties. Spitting on the sidewalk is not the same as first degree murder, either, Martha, but it's still against the law.

[garyhope]

I know she wasn't prosecuted for insider trading, but she engaged in it.

And yes, while arrogance and hubris are not crimes technically, perhaps philosophically they may be to some people with the wherewithal and desire to prosecute you if you offend them with your perceived smugness,arrogance, condescension and hubris and impolitic pronouncements and protestations.

[sitetest]

Dear garyhope,

"I know she wasn't prosecuted for insider trading, but she engaged in it."

So the federal government would like us to believe.

But they were unwilling to prosecute her for it, I suppose because they knew they couldn't make the case.

As for prosecutors who decide to prosecute people because those people are perceived as "smug and arrogance," to me, that is the real smuggness and arrogance, that the decisions would be based on those perceptions. No one has an obligation to be nice to the feds. Last time I looked, we paid the taxes, they cashed the checks drawn on those taxes.

We are not serfs or slaves, to bow down to our federal masters. If they can't handle someone with an unpleasant personality, instead of immorally using their power to crush such persons, they ought to go do that for which they're qualified - hauling away dog crap.

I truly did not like Martha Stewart before all this began. To me, the worst part of this entire debacle is that the immoral treatment of her by the stupid, power-mad federal prosecutors has actually made me feel sorry for her.

Sorry for Martha Stewart! Argh!


sitetest

[garyhope]

Perhaps you misunderstood my reply or I din't explain my self adequately or coherently enough.

I agree with you the government's prosecution of her was arrogant, pointless and wrong and a waste of time and money.

I was talking about the government's motivation to prosecute her, not the validity of their case.

I have mixed or dual feelings about Ms. Stewart. She's a talented and very hard worker who deserves her success due to her hard work, but there may be a certain karmic reaction due to her arrogance or hubris whether you or I agree or disagree with it or not.

I've bought and sold MSO shares and made money on it, so in that respect, I like her.

[sitetest]

Dear garyhope,

"I was talking about the government's motivation to prosecute her, not the validity of their case."

It is this to which I was replying.

"...but there may be a certain karmic reaction due to her arrogance or hubris whether you or I agree or disagree with it or not."

That clarifies your remarks. Gotcha.

Nonetheless, the govt buffoons who did this should still all be boiled in oil.


sitetest

[monkeybrau]

"Of course that is what it's all about," Vanity Fair quotes Stewart as saying. "Bring 'em down a notch, to scare other people. If Martha can be sent to jail, think hard before you sell that stock."

Bingo. Judge couldn't have said it better.