Regarding Martha Stewart and her crime of Insider Trading. Her actions of \"avoiding a loss\" were deemed illegal. Were these actions, which led to being convicted of Insider Trading, also unethical? Please offer a complete explanation of your personal ethical theory as to why her actions were (or were not) unethical. You can revert to one of the three main ethical theories (Virtue Theory, Duty Theory, or Utilitarianism), or you can explain this in terms of your own ethical theory. Solution Martha Stewart was convicted of covering up a crime which was not accused of committing - misuse of inside information in trading. She was sentenced for lying but never charged him a charge of perjury. Martha Stewart was also convicted of \"obstructing justice\". There was no explanation of how the charge against him could be obstructed by explaining his lawyer. This explanation referred to the reasons for Ms. Stewart to make a fully legal sale of its shares in ImClone. In my opinion these actions were unethical due to unfairness, as one investor with some inside information could potentially make far larger profits, or at least, make profits that a typical investor would not make which was the case of Martha Stewart.

1. Regarding Martha Stewart and her crime of Insider Trading. Her actions of "avoiding a loss"
were deemed illegal. Were these actions, which led to being convicted of Insider Trading, also
unethical? Please offer a complete explanation of your personal ethical theory as to why her
actions were (or were not) unethical. You can revert to one of the three main ethical theories
(Virtue Theory, Duty Theory, or Utilitarianism), or you can explain this in terms of your own
ethical theory.
Solution
Martha Stewart was convicted of covering up a crime which was not accused of committing -
misuse of inside information in trading. She was sentenced for lying but never charged him a
charge of perjury.
Martha Stewart was also convicted of "obstructing justice". There was no explanation of how
the charge against him could be obstructed by explaining his lawyer. This explanation referred to
the reasons for Ms. Stewart to make a fully legal sale of its shares in ImClone.
In my opinion these actions were unethical due to unfairness, as one investor with some inside
information could potentially make far larger profits, or at least, make profits that a typical
investor would not make which was the case of Martha Stewart