After a highly publicized six-week jury trial, Stewart was found guilty in March 2004 of felony charges of conspiracy, obstruction of an agency proceeding, and making false statements to federal investigators
Take the "making false statements to federal investigators" one for example, the "false statements" don't have to be at all related to the investigation (or eventual prosecution) at hand, they could have nothing to do with her personal financial matters, they just have to something you say that was not true during the course of the investigation.
Or "conspiracy" and "obstruction", both have a long history of providing law enforcement and prosecutors plenty of leeway to take punitive measures regardless of the feasability of the original case.
Very similar to the long history of 'resisting arrest' and 'assaulting a police officer' being used on a more localized level whenever a citizen did not show total obedience to police, regardless if they committed a crime or not.
More so considering that prior to the sale John Gamble (the CFO) hadn't sold a single share in the three years that he has been with the firm.
https://finance.yahoo.com/screener/insider/GAMBLE%20JOHN%20W...
http://www.nasdaq.com/quotes/insiders/gamble-john-w-jr-60842...
You act as if this is a real senario and would have a non-negligible probability of occurring.
Is that true? What do you mean by "all the time"?
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-06-17/there-mig...
thanks.
If whoever owns those options exercises them today (And covers their short position at a price of $125) they will make ~$2.5m on a ~$200k bet.
This is why the options market is the first place regulators look on insider trading.
I agree the timing is suspicious, but the amounts are pretty small. Even if the stock drops 20% long term due to this (which IMO is highly unlikely), a high ranking executive risking a jail term to avoid losing 50k of stock is (again IMO), absolutely irrational.