Dave Smith wrote:
>
> Nancy Young wrote:
>
> > > > The insider trading charges were dismissed, so my question is, how can
> > > > Martha be charged with obstruction of justice and lying about something
> > > > (insider trading) that she didn't do? Seems like the dismissal of the
> > > > first charge makes the others a moot point.
> > >
> > > The insider trading charges were dismissed due to a lack of evidence
> > > on the part of the prosecutors. That does not mean Martha did not commit
> > > insider trading, only that it could not be proven. Perhaps if Martha had
> > > not lied to the SEC, she would have gotten convicted on the insider
> > > trading charge.
> >
> > I don't believe she was ever charged with insider trading. She can't,
> > she is not an insider.
>
> You do not have to be an insider to be guilty of insider trading. The person
> who trades stocks based on information that was passed on them by the insider
> is as guilty as the insider who passed it on.

She was not charged with insider trading unless I am very much
mistaken. And I think you're wrong about that, no offense at all
intended.

nancy