(855) 4-ESSAYS

Type a new keyword(s) and press Enter to search

Martha Stewart Case Analysis


This response led to the second allegation involving the falsification of information and the second ethical compromise. Ironically this continued to become the highlight of the case. .
             One may wonder why Martha Stewart was willing to risk her reputation and her company by lying and conspiring with her broker. Even worse why would she risk it all in the beginning with the trading for a miniscule gain by her standards. Especially after considering that the outcome of the case as both Martha Stewart and Peter Bucanovic were found guilty on all allegations of falsification of information and conspiracy. .
             The ripple effects of the case did not stop at the verdict in the court room. Martha Living Omnimedia(MSO) shares fell dramatically from its $24 a couple of years ago to its current $10 value. This hurt millions of investors who put their money and trust with MSO. Employees of the company risk losing their jobs due to the loss in performance of the company. .
             The parties hurt by the incident include those not even related to MSO. U.S. Attorney David Kelley said it best when he said that all Americans were victims of Stewart and Bacanovic's crimes because lies to investigators weaken the nation's law enforcement system. This may sound like an exaggeration but it does contain some truth. Both time and money is wasted when facts and evidence are manipulated. And it is the tax payers money that pay the costs of the prosecution. .
             After evaluating the outcomes and facts of the Stewart case let us step back and evaluate what ethical compromises were made and what could have been done to prevent the case. There are two main ethical issues to discuss: insider trading and manipulation of facts in court. .
             First let us discuss the more obvious mistake: The Lie. Lying and conspiring in court is inethical because it degrades our judicial system to bring injustice. Lying alone is an inherently wrong action, and the fact that parties conspired to claim that they had a prior agreement to sell made it an even more obvious ethics problem.


Essays Related to Martha Stewart Case Analysis


Got a writing question? Ask our professional writer!
Submit My Question