New topic
PrintableMsLegs said: RipHer2Shreds said: The difference is in the crimes they were convicted of. Why are you even comparing the two? Entirely different crimes. [Edited 6/16/05 20:15pm]  Again, You can cover for Martha's ass if you want too. In my eyes, the bitch got away with murder. Once a criminal always a damn crimanal . Now,that's all I have to say on the matter.
[Edited 6/16/05 20:23pm] Wow, so Martha is on the same level as the Unabomber with you. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
MsLegs said: RipHer2Shreds said: The difference is in the crimes they were convicted of. Why are you even comparing the two? Entirely different crimes. [Edited 6/16/05 20:15pm] Again, You can cover for Martha's ass if you want too. In my eyes, the bitch got away with murder. Once a criminal always a damn crimanal . Now,that's all I have to say on the matter.
[Edited 6/16/05 20:23pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MsLegs said:  Mods Please!
[Edited 6/16/05 20:24pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MsLegs said: RipHer2Shreds said: The difference is in the crimes they were convicted of. Why are you even comparing the two? Entirely different crimes. [Edited 6/16/05 20:15pm] Again, You can cover for Martha's ass if you want too. In my eyes, the bitch got away with murder. Once a criminal always a damn crimanal . Now,that's all I have to say on the matter.
[Edited 6/16/05 20:23pm] Please, tell me where and when I said Martha didn't commit a crime? I can't recall saying that. I'm not covering for anyone. She got away with murder, huh?  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DavidEye said: Please....no more celebrity trials.I'm sick of this! 
The next famous person who gets accused of a crime is gonna get a smackdown from me | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MsLegs said: Mods Please!
[Edited 6/16/05 20:24pm] The mods ain't going to lock this thread unless there's some flamin' going on. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Didn't Kim lie about been witness at a "shooting" outside hot97 in NY, not a murder, She said she didn't know one of the guys involved and then the prosecution pulled out one of her video clips with her and him dancing together and "shout outs" to him on her album notes. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
twink69 said: Didn't Kim lie about been witness at a "shooting" outside hot97 in NY, not a murder, She said she didn't know one of the guys involved and then the prosecution pulled out one of her video clips with her and him dancing together and "shout outs" to him on her album notes.
Involving her and her entourage, yes. It was a grand jury investigation. She was charged with one count of conspiracy, three counts of perjury, three counts of making false statements and one count of obstruction. A video showed Jones standing on the street during the shootout and then jumping into a limo with people suspected in the incident. Jones and Monique Dopwell, a friend who was with her at the time, were indicted for lying to the grand jury about their knowledge of the shooters and the motive behind the incident. The two other defendants in the case, Damion Butler, one of her managers, and Suif Jackson, a bodyguard and friend, were indicted for firing guns during the incident. Jackson is charged with firing a fully automatic machine gun. Both men are currently serving prison terms for state weapons charges. [Edited 6/16/05 20:35pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
kiss85 said: Hotlegs said: It's a damn shame that they can let Martha Stewart's ass roam about and make her serve time. This definitely proves there is an double standard. Most definitely, the justice system is full of bullshit.
 I know, right?
For Martha, that was only a vacation. Five mos. and she's outta there. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RipHer2Shreds said: MsLegs said: Martha has done some crooked shit and gets a fucking slap on the wrist. Some of you can sit here and justify pampering Martha's ass if you want to but, the justice system is fucked up if Martha can get by with shit and walk and Kim do hard time. I am sorry but this is some flat out bullshit end of story. It's just my  .
 I agree with you. They did pursue Martha and Kim especially with too much authority. However, when a case involves a women, I have noticed that the judicial system tends to be more brash than they would be if a male was involved in the case. Talk about double stadards. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MsLegs said: RipHer2Shreds said: I like Lil Kim, but that wa Nonetheless, I don't think Lil Kim should or will get a harsh sentence. One things for sure, they pursued both of them with all too much authority.
I agree with you. They did pursue Martha and Kim especially with too much authority. However, when a case involves a women, I have noticed that the judicial system tends to be more brash than they would be if a male was involved in the case. Talk about double stadards.Yes, women are often the judicial scapegoats. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
At least plastic surgeons don't make prison visits - give that face a break!    I never met you, but I LOVE you & I will forever!! Thank you for being YOU - my little Princey, the best to EVER do it | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MsLegs said: RipHer2Shreds said: The difference is in the crimes they were convicted of. Why are you even comparing the two? Entirely different crimes. [Edited 6/16/05 20:15pm] Again, You can cover for Martha's ass if you want too. In my eyes, the bitch got away with murder. Once a criminal always a damn crimanal . Now,that's all I have to say on the matter.
[Edited 6/16/05 20:23pm] Actually, no one's coverin for that woman. The point that's bein established is that murder and "theft" (or dishonesty) are two different things. Wouldn't you agree that someone taking your money is dull comparison to someone taking YOUR LIFE? Even though Lil' Kim didn't commit murder, she still lied about a murder, UNDER OATH. Automatically, that's a more serious offense and should be handled accordingly. Naturally, she should get a higher sentence, even though Martha's ass should've gotten a higher sentence, too. What Martha did was no stealing candy from a baby. She practically STOLE millions of dollars from the corporation, her stockholders, and I know her fellow stockholders didn't like that shit at all! So hell yeah, she should've gotten more time. They did WHAT??!....
Org Sci-Fi Association | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
kiss85 said: MsLegs said: Again, You can cover for Martha's ass if you want too. In my eyes, the bitch got away with murder. Once a criminal always a damn crimanal . Now,that's all I have to say on the matter.
[Edited 6/16/05 20:23pm] She practically STOLE millions of dollars from the corporation, her stockholders, and I know her fellow stockholders didn't like that shit at all! So hell yeah, she should've gotten more time. Exactly. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
kiss85 said MsLegs said:
RipHer2Shreds said:
The difference is in the crimes they were convicted of. Why are you even comparing the two? Entirely different crimes. Again, You can cover for Martha's ass if you want too. In my eyes, the bitch got away with murder. Once a criminal always a damn crimanal . Now,that's all I have to say on the matter.Actually, no one's coverin for that woman. The point that's bein established is that murder and "theft" (or dishonesty) are two different things. Wouldn't you agree that someone taking your money is dull comparison to someone taking YOUR LIFE? Even though Lil' Kim didn't commit murder, she still lied about a murder, UNDER OATH. Automatically, that's a more serious offense and should be handled accordingly. Naturally, she should get a higher sentence, even though Martha's ass should've gotten a higher sentence, too. What Martha did was no stealing candy from a baby. She practically STOLE millions of dollars from the corporation, her stockholders, and I know her fellow stockholders didn't like that shit at all! So hell yeah, she should've gotten more time. Actually, Martha Stewart didn't steal anything from anybody. What she was alleged to have done was insider trading; i.e., she owned stock in a biotech company one of her friends partially owned and was running, and she was told that one of the cancer drugs that company was working on was not going to be approved by the FDA for use. Now, if she got this information prior to the public announcement of the FDA's rejection, then she was not supposed to sell her stock until after that news was released. However, she did sell her stock prior to the announcement, but she claimed that she had already planned to sell her stock regardless of any bad news. The jury couldn't convict her of actual insider trading, but they did convict her of obstruction of justice. My take on this is that both cases were bogus. Martha Stewart was an obvious scapegoat to the Enron, WorldCom and Tyco disasters, and the government was looking for a high profile person to convict. Martha may have done something illegal, but what she did was chump change compared to the Enron executives who wiped out their employees' jobs and life savings. Lil' Kim definitely committed perjury, but so did Mark Fuhrman during the OJ Simpson trial when he claimed that he never shook down other African-American suspects he arrested, and also when he said that he never planted evidence at crime scenes when he boasted on tape that he had done this regularly. His lies sent people to prison for at least 20 to 50 years (albeit, some of those people should have gone to prison anyway). Nevertheless, he only got probation for perjury. What Mark Fuhrman did was far more serious than Lil' Kim, but he only got a slap on the wrist. However, the prosecution went after Lil' Kim as though she was one of the trigger people in the gang shootout when any reasonable person would know that she is not a violent criminal. But because she is a "gangsta rapper", the prosecution is trying to give her serious hard time for basically telling lies to the grand jury to cover up for her friends.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
728huey said: kiss85 said MsLegs said:
Actually, no one's coverin for that woman. The point that's bein established is that murder and "theft" (or dishonesty) are two different things. Wouldn't you agree that someone taking your money is dull comparison to someone taking YOUR LIFE? Even though Lil' Kim didn't commit murder, she still lied about a murder, UNDER OATH. Automatically, that's a more serious offense and should be handled accordingly. Naturally, she should get a higher sentence, even though Martha's ass should've gotten a higher sentence, too. What Martha did was no stealing candy from a baby. She practically STOLE millions of dollars from the corporation, her stockholders, and I know her fellow stockholders didn't like that shit at all! So hell yeah, she should've gotten more time. Actually, Martha Stewart didn't steal anything from anybody. What she was alleged to have done was insider trading; i.e., she owned stock in a biotech company one of her friends partially owned and was running, and she was told that one of the cancer drugs that company was working on was not going to be approved by the FDA for use. Now, if she got this information prior to the public announcement of the FDA's rejection, then she was not supposed to sell her stock until after that news was released. However, she did sell her stock prior to the announcement, but she claimed that she had already planned to sell her stock regardless of any bad news. The jury couldn't convict her of actual insider trading, but they did convict her of obstruction of justice. My take on this is that both cases were bogus. Martha Stewart was an obvious scapegoat to the Enron, WorldCom and Tyco disasters, and the government was looking for a high profile person to convict. Martha may have done something illegal, but what she did was chump change compared to the Enron executives who wiped out their employees' jobs and life savings. Lil' Kim definitely committed perjury, but so did Mark Fuhrman during the OJ Simpson trial when he claimed that he never shook down other African-American suspects he arrested, and also when he said that he never planted evidence at crime scenes when he boasted on tape that he had done this regularly. His lies sent people to prison for at least 20 to 50 years (albeit, some of those people should have gone to prison anyway). Nevertheless, he only got probation for perjury. What Mark Fuhrman did was far more serious than Lil' Kim, but he only got a slap on the wrist. However, the prosecution went after Lil' Kim as though she was one of the trigger people in the gang shootout when any reasonable person would know that she is not a violent criminal. But because she is a "gangsta rapper", the prosecution is trying to give her serious hard time for basically telling lies to the grand jury to cover up for her friends. Also, the amount in Martha's case was close to $100,000 (hardly "millions", and she certainly didn't "steal" it from the stockholders - it was her own $$$, as you've pointed out). [Edited 6/18/05 6:39am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
VoicesCarry said: 728huey said: kiss85 said
Actually, Martha Stewart didn't steal anything from anybody. What she was alleged to have done was insider trading; i.e., she owned stock in a biotech company one of her friends partially owned and was running, and she was told that one of the cancer drugs that company was working on was not going to be approved by the FDA for use. Now, if she got this information prior to the public announcement of the FDA's rejection, then she was not supposed to sell her stock until after that news was released. However, she did sell her stock prior to the announcement, but she claimed that she had already planned to sell her stock regardless of any bad news. The jury couldn't convict her of actual insider trading, but they did convict her of obstruction of justice. My take on this is that both cases were bogus. Martha Stewart was an obvious scapegoat to the Enron, WorldCom and Tyco disasters, and the government was looking for a high profile person to convict. Martha may have done something illegal, but what she did was chump change compared to the Enron executives who wiped out their employees' jobs and life savings. Lil' Kim definitely committed perjury, but so did Mark Fuhrman during the OJ Simpson trial when he claimed that he never shook down other African-American suspects he arrested, and also when he said that he never planted evidence at crime scenes when he boasted on tape that he had done this regularly. His lies sent people to prison for at least 20 to 50 years (albeit, some of those people should have gone to prison anyway). Nevertheless, he only got probation for perjury. What Mark Fuhrman did was far more serious than Lil' Kim, but he only got a slap on the wrist. However, the prosecution went after Lil' Kim as though she was one of the trigger people in the gang shootout when any reasonable person would know that she is not a violent criminal. But because she is a "gangsta rapper", the prosecution is trying to give her serious hard time for basically telling lies to the grand jury to cover up for her friends. Also, the amount in Martha's case was close to $100,000 (hardly "millions", and she certainly didn't "steal" it from the stockholders - it was her own $$$, as you've pointed out). [b][Edited 6/18/05 6:39am] Exactly. And she wasn't convicted for insider trading. She was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice. As for Lil Kim, they really wanted to send somebody to jail for this, so they doggedly pursued her, so that somebody, anybody would pay for it. CalhounSq said: At least plastic surgeons don't make prison visits - give that face a break!
Mean...buy funny! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
728huey said: kiss85 said MsLegs said:
Actually, no one's coverin for that woman. The point that's bein established is that murder and "theft" (or dishonesty) are two different things. Wouldn't you agree that someone taking your money is dull comparison to someone taking YOUR LIFE? Even though Lil' Kim didn't commit murder, she still lied about a murder, UNDER OATH. Automatically, that's a more serious offense and should be handled accordingly. Naturally, she should get a higher sentence, even though Martha's ass should've gotten a higher sentence, too. What Martha did was no stealing candy from a baby. She practically STOLE millions of dollars from the corporation, her stockholders, and I know her fellow stockholders didn't like that shit at all! So hell yeah, she should've gotten more time. Actually, Martha Stewart didn't steal anything from anybody. What she was alleged to have done was insider trading; i.e., she owned stock in a biotech company one of her friends partially owned and was running, and she was told that one of the cancer drugs that company was working on was not going to be approved by the FDA for use. Now, if she got this information prior to the public announcement of the FDA's rejection, then she was not supposed to sell her stock until after that news was released. However, she did sell her stock prior to the announcement, but she claimed that she had already planned to sell her stock regardless of any bad news. The jury couldn't convict her of actual insider trading, but they did convict her of obstruction of justice. My take on this is that both cases were bogus. Martha Stewart was an obvious scapegoat to the Enron, WorldCom and Tyco disasters, and the government was looking for a high profile person to convict. Martha may have done something illegal, but what she did was chump change compared to the Enron executives who wiped out their employees' jobs and life savings. Lil' Kim definitely committed perjury, but so did Mark Fuhrman during the OJ Simpson trial when he claimed that he never shook down other African-American suspects he arrested, and also when he said that he never planted evidence at crime scenes when he boasted on tape that he had done this regularly. His lies sent people to prison for at least 20 to 50 years (albeit, some of those people should have gone to prison anyway). Nevertheless, he only got probation for perjury. What Mark Fuhrman did was far more serious than Lil' Kim, but he only got a slap on the wrist. However, the prosecution went after Lil' Kim as though she was one of the trigger people in the gang shootout when any reasonable person would know that she is not a violent criminal. But because she is a "gangsta rapper", the prosecution is trying to give her serious hard time for basically telling lies to the grand jury to cover up for her friends. who are you? and will you marry me? 
and legs baby, lets wait till kim gets her sentence before we judge....she might end up with zero prison time....then all the energy in this thread would have been a waste of time..  Space for sale... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sosgemini said: 728huey said: [b]kiss85 said
Actually, Martha Stewart didn't steal anything from anybody. What she was alleged to have done was insider trading; i.e., she owned stock in a biotech company one of her friends partially owned and was running, and she was told that one of the cancer drugs that company was working on was not going to be approved by the FDA for use. Now, if she got this information prior to the public announcement of the FDA's rejection, then she was not supposed to sell her stock until after that news was released. However, she did sell her stock prior to the announcement, but she claimed that she had already planned to sell her stock regardless of any bad news. The jury couldn't convict her of actual insider trading, but they did convict her of obstruction of justice. My take on this is that both cases were bogus. Martha Stewart was an obvious scapegoat to the Enron, WorldCom and Tyco disasters, and the government was looking for a high profile person to convict. Martha may have done something illegal, but what she did was chump change compared to the Enron executives who wiped out their employees' jobs and life savings. Lil' Kim definitely committed perjury, but so did Mark Fuhrman during the OJ Simpson trial when he claimed that he never shook down other African-American suspects he arrested, and also when he said that he never planted evidence at crime scenes when he boasted on tape that he had done this regularly. His lies sent people to prison for at least 20 to 50 years (albeit, some of those people should have gone to prison anyway). Nevertheless, he only got probation for perjury. What Mark Fuhrman did was far more serious than Lil' Kim, but he only got a slap on the wrist. However, the prosecution went after Lil' Kim as though she was one of the trigger people in the gang shootout when any reasonable person would know that she is not a violent criminal. But because she is a "gangsta rapper", the prosecution is trying to give her serious hard time for basically telling lies to the grand jury to cover up for her friends. who are you? and will you marry me?
and legs baby, lets wait till kim gets her sentence before we judge....she might end up with zero prison time....then all the energy in this thread would have been a waste of time.. Well, it remains to be seen. So far, things don't look grim for Kim. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Hotlegs said: It's a damn shame that they can let Martha Stewart's ass roam about and make her serve time. This definitely proves there is an double standard. Most definitely, the justice system is full of bullshit.
Perhaps the difference between a violent crime and a non-violent crime ? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Hotlegs said: kiss85 said: She practically STOLE millions of dollars from the corporation, her stockholders, and I know her fellow stockholders didn't like that shit at all! So hell yeah, she should've gotten more time. Exactly. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |