OK - Bill Frist did what Martha Stewart allegedly did

[AussieDave]

why isn't he on trial ????

[babylonsister]

1. It's a new story here; he just may wind up in

court/jail. We have to watch it play out, but I'm in agreement. He's guiltier because he supposedly had/has the public trust.

[ClintonTyree]

2. Give it time.........

the investigation is just starting. They didn't put Martha in the slammer overnight and Frist will be no different. Patience is a virtue.

[AussieDave]

3. I hear ya there, but when it comes to these things

I'm a supreme pessimist - unless they get a fearless prosecutor to take Frist on then he'll walk.

[zanne]

10. So, which prison is Ken Lay in? n/t

[Spinzonner]

4. Martha was convicted and imprisoned for lying to authorities

and obstruction of justice and related conspiracies. This was a result of suspicion and investigation for insider trading, but that was not criminally prosecuted.

So far, Frist is only suspected of Insider Trading which is not often criminally prosecuted except in certain egregious cases (such as involving corporate fraud or being a source). However, if he engages in continued evasions he could back himself into a set of problems like Martha had.

I don't know if there are any criminal or civil sanctions related to abusing a so-called blind trust.

[Lasher]

5. Martha was convicted of lying, not insider trading

Martha Stewart's convictions are as follows: conspiracy (specifically obstructing an agency proceeding, false statements, and perjury); false statements (two counts); and obstruction of justice.

[AussieDave]

6. I stand (or sit) corrected - thanks for setting me straight

but who knows if Frist won't do the same thing (lying, perjury, etc.) ????

[abluelady]

11. And We Know Bill Frist Doesn't Lie. eom

[Kagemusha]

7. Frist's seeing-eye blind trust was probably totally legal...

However, using the trust to sell the shares in the middle of a share dump by major shareholders two weeks before a big earnings warning looks suspicious. Having a blind trust that isn't blind, well, blame Congress for writing the idiot laws regarding them. (And I do, I very much do.) But that is not an adequate defense against insider trading. It's just that given the circumstances (other people on the inside dumping too), if you can't prove anything's fishy about the others, it's hard to go after Frist. That means more investigating, more resources, more time.

So in the most literal sense he's not on trial because it's too soon; the feds can't prove to themselves let alone to a jury that what he did was felonious.

Yet.

[Benhurst]

8. Throw him into the cell next to Ken "Kenny Boy" Lay. Oh, wait, I

forgot. Mr.Enron isn't in jail.

[zbdent]

9. This morning, on the Bill Press show, they played some clips of Frist

explaining how he didn't know what was in the "blind trust", and that there was no legal way he could control the buying and selling of specific stocks in that blind trust. That would be "ILLEGAL" - Frist's own word.

And now, Frist is saying that he directed selling off of that specific set of stocks (that he "was unaware of" owning) - which, by his own words, IS ILLEGAL!

There's a lot more evidence here than there was to convict Martha Stewart - she was convicted on the premise of a phone call that they didn't even have a tape of . . .

[blondeatlast]

12. What state would have the jurisdiction?

An AG's political aspirations will play big into this, whether we like it or not.