Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Bacanovic Sentencing in Court now Under Way; Infamous Inmates
Aired July 16, 2004 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Martha Stewart's former broker, Peter Bacanovic, is being sentenced in a New York courtroom right now. And like Martha Stewart, he was convicted of lying about the reasons for her sale of ImClone stock. We're going to bring you his sentence just as soon as we get it.
And "Now in the News," Martha Stewart gets jail time, but she's not going to prison anytime soon. We're going to have her sentence and her heeded reaction outside the court straight ahead.
Talking education: Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry is speaking this hour before the American Federation of Teachers convention in Washington. He's promising to provide public schools with the funding they need to get the job done. John Kerry is expected to win the group's endorsement.
BETTY NGUYEN, CNN ANCHOR: We talked a lot today about the Martha Stewart sentencing, but Peter Bacanovic has also had his day in court. In fact, he's there right now. And we are waiting for that sentencing. For that, we want to go now live to Mary Snow right outside the courthouse with the latest.
Mary, it's taking a long time. We expected a sentence by now.
MARY SNOW, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, certainly. But -- because when Martha Stewart was sentenced, we certainly had news within about 15 or 20 minutes or so, and so we're still waiting to find out what is happening in the courtroom, waiting for the sentencing from Judge Miriam Cedarbaum.
As you just mentioned, Peter Bacanovic, Martha Stewart's former stockbroker, is facing a sentence very similar to Martha Stewart under the federal sentencing guidelines. The sentence calls for 10 to 16 months.
And just a few days ago, Judge Miriam Cedarbaum granted his request to have a separate sentencing. This is something that he had requested, his team did. He was seen as being kind of shadowed in the spotlight of Martha Stewart's celebrity status. He had at one point requested a separate trial.
We all know that didn't happen. But he said in his argument to the judge that he deserved a separate sentencing, and she agreed.
The question is, will he get the same sentence as Martha Stewart? This, of course, all involving the stock fraud of ImClone stock sales in 2001. And Peter Bacanovic's charge is very similar to Martha Stewart, although he has been charged with perjury, and he was convicted of that. Martha Stewart had not been charged with that.
This comes all just hours after Martha Stewart was sentenced to five months in prison, five months of home imprisonment. She chose her Bedford, New York, home to serve out that five-month term of home confinement in which time she will have to wear an electronic bracelet.
Now, the judge also sentenced her to two years of probation and a $30,000 fine, but the judge did stay the sentence pending an appeal. And she has hired a very high-profile appellate lawyer, Walter Dellinger, to handle her appeal. She had hired him some time ago, and now he will take over in the appeal.
This, after Martha Stewart spoke for the first time in court. She did not testify at her trial, but she did make a statement to Judge Miriam Cedarbaum, asking for her to take into consideration certain things, including what she said was "all the intense suffering that I and so many dear others have endured every single moment of the past two-and-a-half years."
She also told the judge, "My hopes are that my life will not be completely destroyed while entirely in your competent and experienced and merciful hands." Martha Stewart, of course, speaking after the sentencing, for the first time really sensing emotion in her voice both inside and outside the courtroom, and also her -- showed some affection when she kissed her daughter, Alexis, at one point inside the courtroom after making her statement to the judge.
So, once again, we are waiting for the sentencing of her former stockbroker, Peter Bacanovic, who faces, again, 10 to 16 months in prison. And once we get word, we'll certainly pass it on to you -- Betty.
NGUYEN: Mary, we're looking at similar charges. But in Stewart's case, a lot of folks are speculating that she got the five months because of her good deeds, her charitable work. For Bacanovic, what does he have in his favor along those lines?
SNOW: Well, like Martha Stewart, he has had people write to the judge on his behalf, or others have volunteered to write to the judge on his behalf. Judge Miriam Cedarbaum said that she read 1,500-or-so- odd letters from Martha Stewart's supporters. She said she read every one of them and that she took them into considerations. So we do know that he has also sent -- his supporters have sent the judge some of her letters as well.
Unlike Martha Stewart, we have not seen a high-profile appellate lawyer being added to the defense team. So the question is, you know, will he appeal this as well? And that is one of the big differences in these two cases.
NGUYEN: CNN's Mary Snow standing outside the courthouse as we wait for that sentence. Thank you, Mary -- Carol.
LIN: Martha Stewart's lawyers say they have ample grounds for an appeal. But other experts are not so convinced. One of those people is CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: This was a very fair trial. I sat through it. Martha Stewart had excellent lawyers representing her.
The judge in certain key cases already ruled in favor of Martha Stewart. Remember, this the judge who threw out the securities fraud count against her. So it's not like this was some horrendously biased judge.
And if you look at the points Arthur Dellinger, a truly excellent lawyer, suggested today that he would be raising, they are not the kind of cases -- arguments that usually succeed in getting a trial overturned. Martha Stewart's main concern today is to make sure that her company survives. And she did succeed through her determination and suggestion that the company will proceed and thrive.
The stock is up in her company today, but I don't think her statement today will make much difference. But, you know, her big problem from the very beginning has been, if she simply acknowledged the truth, acknowledged what happened, none of this would have -- none of -- this prosecution never would have taken place. But she has refused since this stock transaction on December 27, 2001...
LIN: Right.
TOOBIN: ... to acknowledge she did anything wrong, and that's been the big problem.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LIN: Much more on this. Stay with CNN for extensive coverage of the Martha Stewart case.
This Monday, for example, you can hear from Martha Stewart herself when she gives her first and only live interview since being sentenced. That's on "LARRY KING LIVE," Monday, 9:00 p.m. Eastern, 6:00 Pacific.
NGUYEN: And she's even taking viewer calls during that live show.
Martha Stewart is the latest in a long line of corporate giants to be sentenced to prison as a result of financial wrongdoing. CNN's Jen Rogers looks back at some of the other infamous inmates.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEN ROGERS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): They were rich, they were smart, and they got caught, hard charging driven business leaders, masters of the universe one day, inmates the next. There's Michael Milken, the former junk bond king who served nearly two years for securities law violations.
MICHAEL DOUGLAS, ACTOR, "WALL STREET": Greed, for lack of a better word, is good.
ROGERS: The inspiration for that famous line from the movie "Wall Street" was Ivan Boesky, who also traded in pinstripes for prison stripes for his role in the insider trading scandal. And Charles Keating, a name synonymous with the savings and loan scandal, served time for convictions that were eventually overturned.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
LIN: All right. Right now, we're going to go to breaking news at a New York federal courthouse. Mary Snow is standing by with the latest.
Have we heard about the sentencing of Peter Bacanovic yet -- Mary. Mary?
SNOW: Carol, if you can hear me, we just got the sentencing. It is the same one as Martha Stewart. Peter Bacanovic, her former stockbroker, sentenced to five months in prison and five months home confinement. This is the same exact sentencing that Martha Stewart got just hours ago. And it was anticipated that this was likely the scenario that was going to be happening.
So not a really big surprise that her stockbroker, really charged with most of the charges, the same ones that Martha Stewart had been convicted of. And now it is confirmed that Judge Miriam Cedarbaum has sentenced Peter Bacanovic to five months in prison and five months of home confinement.
LIN: Mary, do you know yet...
SNOW: When we get some more details -- OK.
LIN: All right. I'm just wondering if you have any color yet. Did he talk in the courtroom? Martha Stewart made her statement earlier today before the judge.
SNOW: We do not have word yet about the color and what happened. We're going to go and check with our colleagues inside the courtroom...
LIN: OK.
SNOW: ... and get them back to you as soon as we can.
LIN: All right. Had to ask, Mary. Thanks very much. We'll get right back to you as soon as you get some more.
SNOW: Sure.
LIN: Right now, we want to bring back our legal guest, Jeffrey Jacobovitz. He's a trial attorney, lots of experience as a criminal defense attorney.
Jeffrey, what do you make of the sentencing?
(CROSSTALK)
JEFFREY JACOBOVITZ, TRIAL ATTORNEY: It's not unusual at all. I'm sorry to interrupt. It's a very equitable sentence in light of the fact of what Martha Stewart received.
We had predicted that that probably would be the sentence. It's a 10-month sentence, a split sentence, with five months home confinement, five months in prison. We haven't heard yet from Mary whether in fact the judge is staying the sentence pending appeal, allowing Bacanovic to appeal his sentence. Most likely, she will, and...
LIN: Jeffrey?
JACOBOVITZ: Yes?
LIN: I'm going to interrupt you. Excuse me. We want to take advantage of your legal experience, but first I need to go back to Mary Snow, who's got more information.
Mary, what have you heard?
SNOW: Carol, we don't yet know about staying the sentence, but one of the other things that Judge Miriam Cedarbaum has sentenced Peter Bacanovic to is a $4,000 fine. Martha Stewart had been fined $30,000, Peter Bacanovic fined $4,000. So very similar sentencing, except for that monetary quotient there.
LIN: All right.
Jeffrey, continue on. A $4,000 fine, not much money really.
JACOBOVITZ: Right. It's negligible compared to what the charges were, and particularly in light of what his attorneys' fees probably were. But the sentences are very parallel, and it's not unusual in this scenario.
LIN: You're not surprised then. Because we had talked earlier about his culpability, the fact that he initiated the call to Martha Stewart.
JACOBOVITZ: Right, but here we have the two defendants getting convicted of essentially the same offenses. And because of the leniency in Stewart's sentencing, it would have been unusual for the judge to not to be lenient as well for Bacanovic. I wouldn't -- well, I would be surprised if Bacanovic doesn't appeal. He will appeal, most likely, and ask for that stay in the sentence.
LIN: All right. You know -- I mean, I have to make a point that the charges are not related to insider trading, which is what it may sound like with my question to you. I'm just wondering whether the judge takes into account the circumstances around the obstructions of justice, the -- the lying charges. But clearly, she stuck straight to the book.
JACOBOVITZ: Well, that's an interesting question, because there was a recent Supreme Court decision called Blakely (ph) which really restricts federal judges from considering issues outside of the indictment in terms of what the sentence should be. The judge does consider everything, though. And it could be the judge is sending a message as well that they were convicted, these are serious charges, but these aren't charges like Enron and those types of charges, where people are spending extraordinary amount of times in jail.
LIN: How much of a difference does it make that Martha Stewart in her appeals process is spending a lot of money, big bucks on a high-profile appellate lawyer specializing in appeal cases? Peter Bacanovic may not have those resources to do the same.
JACOBOVITZ: He may not. But, in fact, he has the same issues, and so he could essentially get a free ride off of what Martha Stewart's lawyers are doing, because his attorneys will probably join in the same appeal.
LIN: Hold that thought, Jeffrey. Going back to Mary Snow for more breaking news out of the courthouse.
Mary, what do you have?
SNOW: Carol, we're getting more details about what happened at the sentencing. Peter Bacanovic did speak, telling Judge Miriam Cedarbaum, "I deeply regret the sorrow and pain this case has caused my family and friends." And he called this "a horrible ordeal for my family and friends."
So Peter Bacanovic speaking before Judge Miriam Cedarbaum before he was sentenced. That sentence, five months in prison, five months home confinement, $4,000 fine, very similar sentence to Martha Stewart -- Carol.
LIN: Mary, are you expecting Peter Bacanovic to exit in the same manner, come to the microphones, talk to the reporters?
SNOW: Well, he'll exit in the same man manner. The big question, though, is, will he speak to reporters?
He has been very low key. Talking to some of his representatives beforehand, they were not sure whether or not he was going to make a statement.
That's one of the stark contrasts between him and Martha Stewart, where Martha Stewart has been out and about, seen publicly. She's even spoken a couple of times since her conviction. Peter Bacanovic has pretty much really been very low key, and not sure whether he's going to speak to reporters.
LIN: Has he been working at all?
SNOW: From what we know and what we've read about, with friends of his quoting -- there was a story in "The New York Times" yesterday. It seems that he was spending a lot of time in California with some of his friends. And it doesn't appear that he had been working. You know, he was barred from the securities industry now obviously because of what has happened with the ImClone stock.
LIN: Right, because he was the stockbroker to the stars out there in the Hamptons. He circulated amongst the same crowds as Martha Stewart.
SNOW: He really was seen on the social circuit, and his name was certainly known. And, you know, in talking to people who know him, he certainly seemed to have a very large circle of friends, had a very good reputation, but was very successful at Merrill Lynch.
One of his other clients obviously was Sam Waksal. And that fateful day, December 27th of 2001, when Sam Waksal had called Peter Bacanovic's office, Peter Bacanovic was on vacation. But Waksal wanted to dump his stock. And the center of this case really focused on what happened in that day, and days after, and what Bacanovic had told investigators, as well as Martha Stewart, in terms of what had happened.
They had always said that they had an agreement to sell the stock once it fell below a certain price, but prosecutors have alleged that it was a cover-up. And one of the most damaging -- the most damaging evidence against him was his assistant, Doug Faneuil, who testified against him and cooperated with prosecutors.
LIN: All right. Thanks, Mary, very much. We'll get back to you as soon as you learn more. If you see Peter Bacanovic at the microphone, let us know.
Jeffrey Jacobovitz, our special guest, are you still with us?
JACOBOVITZ: I'm with you.
LIN: What do you make of what's going to happen next now? What's going to happen in the appeals process? And will it be different for Peter Bacanovic than it will be for Martha Stewart?
JACOBOVITZ: Well, Carol, after what you said, maybe he should go to jail and write a book "Stockbroker to the Stars."
LIN: That may be the only career available to him at this point.
JACOBOVITZ: That's right, although he only has five months to do it. I think that at this point the appeal process will begin. The process generally takes approximately a year, and that's why Bacanovic will most likely be out on the street during this time period, because otherwise it eviscerates his sentence if in fact he's in jail during this time period.
He will begin the appeals process. After a year, if the -- if the second circuit does not overturn the verdict, most likely they will appeal to the Supreme Court and try to get what's called granting cert (ph). It's probably unlikely that the Supreme Court would hear this, and then they would have to begin their sentences if, in fact, he...
LIN: So you're saying a couple of years. It could be a couple of years then?
JACOBOVITZ: It could be at least a year and a half, that's right.
LIN: OK. All right. Interesting. Well, as our Jeffrey Toobin has said, nobody's in a hurry to go to prison.
JACOBOVITZ: That's right.
LIN: So we'll watch closely during the appeals process. Thanks very much, Jeffrey.
JACOBOVITZ: Thank you.
LIN: Betty?
NGUYEN: For those of you just joining us, do want to tell you that Peter Bacanovic, Martha Stewart's stockbroker, has been sentenced to a term that's very similar, exactly the same as Martha Stewart's, five months prison, two years probation, five months home confinement.
We want to go now to CNN's Mary Snow, who is standing outside the courthouse.
The only thing that differs here is the fine. Talk to us to about Peter's fine -- Peter Bacanovic's fine.
SNOW: Yes, Betty. The fine is $4,000 for Peter Bacanovic. It was $30,000 for Martha Stewart. But in terms of the sentence, as you said, five months in prison, five months home confinement.
And, you know, up until today, Betty, Martha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic had been in the same courtroom trial throughout. Now, their sentencing had been separate.
Peter Bacanovic, though, like Martha Stewart, got up in court before Judge Miriam Cedarbaum, saying, "I deeply regret the sorrow and pain that this case has caused my family and friends," calling it "a horrible ordeal for my family and friends."
Also, one of the things that the judge took into consideration in sentencing Bacanovic was 200 letters that were sent on his behalf. And we know from Martha Stewart's case, Judge Cedarbaum said that she read every one of the 1,500 letters that she received on Martha Stewart's behalf.
She's a very deliberate judge, and really taking every piece of evidence and every piece of document that comes before her, going through it very thoroughly. So that was one of the things taken into consideration when she made this decision -- Betty.
NGUYEN: Let's talk a little bit about the timeframe here, when Martha Stewart went for her sentencing. It happened very quickly. But this took a little bit longer, yet it's the same sentence. What are you hearing as to what went on inside that courtroom and why it took so long? SNOW: Well, Betty, we're still waiting for some of the details to come out. But one thing that we could perhaps speculate on is one big thing that happened in between the conviction and today was the fact that a U.S. Secret Service agent was charged with perjury in his testimony. And that Secret Service agent really was testifying about Peter Bacanovic, because he had testified about a document that belonged to Bacanovic, as prosecutors were trying to make their case that Bacanovic altered that document that showed Martha Stewart's stock sale.
So that was seen, obviously, as a very big development since the conviction. And, of course, the case was made for a new trial, which the judge rejected. But perhaps the lawyers were talking about the possible appeal that they are planning. That is certainly a very big component since it dealt directly with Peter Bacanovic.
NGUYEN: Both are looking for an appeal. In the Martha Stewart case, her attorneys asked for her to go to Danbury, Connecticut, where there's a prison there close to her home. In this case, Bacanovic, where are you expecting him to go?
SNOW: That's a good question, Betty. In terms of the requests that his lawyers have made, we have not gotten word yet about the specific facility where they are requesting.
Once we do know -- what we do know is that the Bureau of Prisons usually sentences somebody to 500 miles within the radius of their home in New York, and that is usually the guidelines. But my colleague, Allan Chernoff, has just gotten out of the courtroom, so I'm going to throw it back to you. And he'll be here in a second just to give you more details.
NGUYEN: Absolutely. Fast-moving developments in this sentencing today.
Right now, we want to turn it over to Carol with the latest -- Carol.
LIN: All right, Betty. Just want to bring people back up to date that we just heard about the sentencing of Peter Bacanovic, who is Martha Stewart's stockbroker, who had tipped her off to sale of ImClone stock by the chairman of that company. It enabled her to sell her stock early before the stock plunged. But now they had obstructed the investigation by lying to the investigators, and that is what both have been found guilty of and sentenced -- both sentenced to five months in prison, five months home confinement.
Different fines. Martha Stewart getting $30,000, Peter Bacanovic getting $4,000. We're waiting to see if he comes to the microphones. But in the meantime, the atmosphere in the courtroom must have been electric as this case finally starts winding down, coming to a close. Our Allan Chernoff was inside.
Allan, was there a reaction by Peter Bacanovic when he heard the sentence? ALLAN CHERNOFF, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Peter Bacanovic, immediately after hearing the sentence, after the proceeding was all over, turned. You could clearly see a smile on his face.
He gave a big hug and a kiss to his mom and then to his dad, and also other supporters in the room. Clearly, quite relieved that he also had received the minimum sentence, being five months in prison and then five months of home detention. So clearly, quite a bit of relief for Peter Bacanovic, the former stockbroker to Martha Stewart.
LIN: What about the statement that he made to the judge and how he spoke? What was his demeanor? What was the sense and the feeling he was trying to get across?
CHERNOFF: Peter Bacanovic was very calm, as he was through the entire trial, almost stone-faced. He did speak very briefly before the judge, saying that he was so sorry for all the -- the trouble this had brought to his family and to his friends. But the vast majority of the proceeding was really dominated by his attorney, Richard Strasbourg (ph), who spoke for nearly 30 minutes, praising Mr. Bacanovic, repeatedly referring to the approximately 250 letters that had been written on his behalf, one of the letters describing Peter as the "closest thing to an angel on this Earth."
LIN: Good grief.
CHERNOFF: Several letters from people who knew -- knew Peter very well and described acts of kindness by Peter. One woman who had lost her husband in an auto accident, Peter had flown out, taken care of the woman, taken her to dinner, really gone out of his way.
Somebody, frankly, who was described as someone he wasn't particularly close with, but nonetheless had really made an effort. So Richard Strasbourg (ph), his attorney, spent a long time describing Peter as a kind person, a man with a very big heart.
LIN: Yes. Allan, we are looking at a double-shot here both of you and the courthouse steps. We are waiting for Peter Bacanovic to come out. We see some people coming out, his parents coming down the courthouse steps.
I don't know, Allan, if you have a monitor there. We're waiting for Peter Bacanovic to come out. Can you describe who some of those people are?
CHERNOFF: Right. It looks to me that that's -- those are his parents right there, his father in the middle, and I believe to the left -- I'm not sure, frankly, if that is his mom.
LIN: Where is he right now?
CHERNOFF: But the father in the middle there.
LIN: Where is Peter Bacanovic right now?
CHERNOFF: Well, Peter Bacanovic would still be in the courtroom. I mean, the proceedings finished only minutes ago. So I don't believe he's -- he stepped out just yet.
And keep in mind, the proceedings today were on the third floor of the courtroom. So it does take -- of the courthouse, so it does take a little bit to get outside.
LIN: Did you see as Bacanovic's attorney was making this, you know, character reference for Peter Bacanovic, talking about what a wonderful guy he was, could you see any reaction by the judge? Obviously, for the attorney to go on for 30 minutes about different character witnesses for Peter Bacanovic, he wanted to impress the judge to influence either the sentence -- final sentencing or even the possible appeal down the road.
CHERNOFF: Judge Cedarbaum listened very intently, certainly gave the courtesy to Peter Bacanovic. During the trial itself, the judge repeatedly had expressed annoyance with Mr. Bacanovic's defense attorneys, who did tend to go on and on, particularly the co-council, Richard Strasbourg (ph). But in this situation, the judge was certainly patient, certainly quite willing to hear it all out. She did briefly mention, though, that she had read all of those letters very carefully.
LIN: Do you think -- was it your sense that it had an influence in her decision, that he got the minimum sentence?
CHERNOFF: Yes, without question. The judge did say that it is quite clear you have been a person who has been extremely kind, was giving of himself. So it seems that the judge, in fact, certainly did have some sympathy.
And I think also the judge recognized that these were letters written by people who personally know Peter Bacanovic. Now, earlier today, of course, we heard about the 1,500 letters written to the judge on behalf of Martha Stewart. But clearly, many of those letters written by people who perhaps don't really know Martha Stewart personally but have been perhaps influenced by Ms. Stewart.
LIN: So is there a stay on the sentence right now during the appeal?
CHERNOFF: Yes, there is. The judge said that she would permit that. And it seems that there would be such an appeal. But we don't know the details of what the Bacanovic team is planning just yet. Martha Stewart's team has been very public, very vocal with all of its plans, of course.
LIN: Right. Right. Allan, you've watched this case from pretty much the beginning, and now to the end. Give me some of your impressions. Were you surprised?
CHERNOFF: Certainly not surprised that the verdict had come down against Martha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic. There was even, in the words of the judge, overwhelming evidence. And the defense was minimal. It really appeared that the defense had miscalculated in thinking that it did not need to put on all that much of a case. But in terms of the sentencing itself, the guidelines had prescribed 10 months to 16 months. And the judge clearly did move to the -- the most lenient side of that.
LIN: Right.
CHERNOFF: And I don't think all that many people had necessarily predicted that, although Judge Cedarbaum does have a reputation for not being a particularly harsh judge in terms of sentencing.
LIN: All right. Thanks very much, Allan. Keep an eye on those courthouse steps behind you. We're waiting to see if Peter Bacanovic speaks to reporters, as we heard and saw that Martha Stewart did so earlier, expressing a lot of emotion, frustration, anger at the whole process of the court proceedings over the last two years.
We want to bring back our legal guest, Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a trial attorney who has a lot of experience in criminal defense.
Jeffrey, you were just listening to Allan Chernoff describe the emotional, impassioned and lengthy testimony by Bacanovic's attorney to the judge, reading letters of testimony, different people contributing to some sort of character betrayal, just that Peter was a good guy. He tried to help people in need, people in trouble.
How much of an influence do you think that had on the minimum sentencing, or do you think the judge came into the courtroom with her mind made up?
JACOBOVITZ: I think the judge's mind was made up going into the courtroom. It's hard to tell, but generally that's what happens.
What I found significant, though, was the fact that Bacanovic made a statement to the court and showed a lot of remorse. And I think the judge did accept that.
The other thing that was significant with what Allan said was the judge found that there was overwhelming evidence. And that is important when it comes time for the appeal, because, frequently, circuit courts, appellate courts find that any errors are harmless, and, in fact, the defendant would have been convicted anyway. So that's an important statement by the judge.
LIN: All right. Thanks very much, Jeffrey.
I'm going to turn it over to Betty.
NGUYEN: We want to go now to CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin to talk about this sentencing.
Jeffrey, are you surprised at all? I mean, they were charged with the same thing and got the same sentence, it appears.
TOOBIN: Almost -- almost identical crimes, almost identical sentences. So I guess you can't be too surprised. What was interesting was that there were factors that pushed Judge Cedarbaum in different directions, as regard to Peter Bacanovic. At one level, just to state the obvious, he's a much smaller fish. He's not famous, he's not prominent. He is not the reason this case was brought.
So that would argue perhaps for a lesser sentence than Martha Stewart. But if you follow the facts of the case, Peter Bacanovic actually engaged in more criminal activity than Martha Stewart did. It was his betrayal of his trust as a stockbroker that caused him to call Martha Stewart in the first place and improperly tell her that Martha -- that Sam Waksal was selling his shares. And, that he not only lied to investigators, he tried to get his assistant, Douglas Faneuil, to lie as well.
So she was pushed in two directions, less harsh because he's not so prominent, more harsh because he engaged in more conduct. As a result, understandably, she basically -- she just gave him essentially the same sentence as Martha Stewart.
NGUYEN: Senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, we thank you for that. And that's about going to do it for us here in Atlanta for LIVE FROM. But "INSIDE POLITICS" is next, so you want to stay tuned. A lot of news to tell you about today.
Thanks for joining us.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired July 16, 2004 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Martha Stewart's former broker, Peter Bacanovic, is being sentenced in a New York courtroom right now. And like Martha Stewart, he was convicted of lying about the reasons for her sale of ImClone stock. We're going to bring you his sentence just as soon as we get it.
And "Now in the News," Martha Stewart gets jail time, but she's not going to prison anytime soon. We're going to have her sentence and her heeded reaction outside the court straight ahead.
Talking education: Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry is speaking this hour before the American Federation of Teachers convention in Washington. He's promising to provide public schools with the funding they need to get the job done. John Kerry is expected to win the group's endorsement.
BETTY NGUYEN, CNN ANCHOR: We talked a lot today about the Martha Stewart sentencing, but Peter Bacanovic has also had his day in court. In fact, he's there right now. And we are waiting for that sentencing. For that, we want to go now live to Mary Snow right outside the courthouse with the latest.
Mary, it's taking a long time. We expected a sentence by now.
MARY SNOW, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, certainly. But -- because when Martha Stewart was sentenced, we certainly had news within about 15 or 20 minutes or so, and so we're still waiting to find out what is happening in the courtroom, waiting for the sentencing from Judge Miriam Cedarbaum.
As you just mentioned, Peter Bacanovic, Martha Stewart's former stockbroker, is facing a sentence very similar to Martha Stewart under the federal sentencing guidelines. The sentence calls for 10 to 16 months.
And just a few days ago, Judge Miriam Cedarbaum granted his request to have a separate sentencing. This is something that he had requested, his team did. He was seen as being kind of shadowed in the spotlight of Martha Stewart's celebrity status. He had at one point requested a separate trial.
We all know that didn't happen. But he said in his argument to the judge that he deserved a separate sentencing, and she agreed.
The question is, will he get the same sentence as Martha Stewart? This, of course, all involving the stock fraud of ImClone stock sales in 2001. And Peter Bacanovic's charge is very similar to Martha Stewart, although he has been charged with perjury, and he was convicted of that. Martha Stewart had not been charged with that.
This comes all just hours after Martha Stewart was sentenced to five months in prison, five months of home imprisonment. She chose her Bedford, New York, home to serve out that five-month term of home confinement in which time she will have to wear an electronic bracelet.
Now, the judge also sentenced her to two years of probation and a $30,000 fine, but the judge did stay the sentence pending an appeal. And she has hired a very high-profile appellate lawyer, Walter Dellinger, to handle her appeal. She had hired him some time ago, and now he will take over in the appeal.
This, after Martha Stewart spoke for the first time in court. She did not testify at her trial, but she did make a statement to Judge Miriam Cedarbaum, asking for her to take into consideration certain things, including what she said was "all the intense suffering that I and so many dear others have endured every single moment of the past two-and-a-half years."
She also told the judge, "My hopes are that my life will not be completely destroyed while entirely in your competent and experienced and merciful hands." Martha Stewart, of course, speaking after the sentencing, for the first time really sensing emotion in her voice both inside and outside the courtroom, and also her -- showed some affection when she kissed her daughter, Alexis, at one point inside the courtroom after making her statement to the judge.
So, once again, we are waiting for the sentencing of her former stockbroker, Peter Bacanovic, who faces, again, 10 to 16 months in prison. And once we get word, we'll certainly pass it on to you -- Betty.
NGUYEN: Mary, we're looking at similar charges. But in Stewart's case, a lot of folks are speculating that she got the five months because of her good deeds, her charitable work. For Bacanovic, what does he have in his favor along those lines?
SNOW: Well, like Martha Stewart, he has had people write to the judge on his behalf, or others have volunteered to write to the judge on his behalf. Judge Miriam Cedarbaum said that she read 1,500-or-so- odd letters from Martha Stewart's supporters. She said she read every one of them and that she took them into considerations. So we do know that he has also sent -- his supporters have sent the judge some of her letters as well.
Unlike Martha Stewart, we have not seen a high-profile appellate lawyer being added to the defense team. So the question is, you know, will he appeal this as well? And that is one of the big differences in these two cases.
NGUYEN: CNN's Mary Snow standing outside the courthouse as we wait for that sentence. Thank you, Mary -- Carol.
LIN: Martha Stewart's lawyers say they have ample grounds for an appeal. But other experts are not so convinced. One of those people is CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: This was a very fair trial. I sat through it. Martha Stewart had excellent lawyers representing her.
The judge in certain key cases already ruled in favor of Martha Stewart. Remember, this the judge who threw out the securities fraud count against her. So it's not like this was some horrendously biased judge.
And if you look at the points Arthur Dellinger, a truly excellent lawyer, suggested today that he would be raising, they are not the kind of cases -- arguments that usually succeed in getting a trial overturned. Martha Stewart's main concern today is to make sure that her company survives. And she did succeed through her determination and suggestion that the company will proceed and thrive.
The stock is up in her company today, but I don't think her statement today will make much difference. But, you know, her big problem from the very beginning has been, if she simply acknowledged the truth, acknowledged what happened, none of this would have -- none of -- this prosecution never would have taken place. But she has refused since this stock transaction on December 27, 2001...
LIN: Right.
TOOBIN: ... to acknowledge she did anything wrong, and that's been the big problem.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LIN: Much more on this. Stay with CNN for extensive coverage of the Martha Stewart case.
This Monday, for example, you can hear from Martha Stewart herself when she gives her first and only live interview since being sentenced. That's on "LARRY KING LIVE," Monday, 9:00 p.m. Eastern, 6:00 Pacific.
NGUYEN: And she's even taking viewer calls during that live show.
Martha Stewart is the latest in a long line of corporate giants to be sentenced to prison as a result of financial wrongdoing. CNN's Jen Rogers looks back at some of the other infamous inmates.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEN ROGERS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): They were rich, they were smart, and they got caught, hard charging driven business leaders, masters of the universe one day, inmates the next. There's Michael Milken, the former junk bond king who served nearly two years for securities law violations.
MICHAEL DOUGLAS, ACTOR, "WALL STREET": Greed, for lack of a better word, is good.
ROGERS: The inspiration for that famous line from the movie "Wall Street" was Ivan Boesky, who also traded in pinstripes for prison stripes for his role in the insider trading scandal. And Charles Keating, a name synonymous with the savings and loan scandal, served time for convictions that were eventually overturned.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
LIN: All right. Right now, we're going to go to breaking news at a New York federal courthouse. Mary Snow is standing by with the latest.
Have we heard about the sentencing of Peter Bacanovic yet -- Mary. Mary?
SNOW: Carol, if you can hear me, we just got the sentencing. It is the same one as Martha Stewart. Peter Bacanovic, her former stockbroker, sentenced to five months in prison and five months home confinement. This is the same exact sentencing that Martha Stewart got just hours ago. And it was anticipated that this was likely the scenario that was going to be happening.
So not a really big surprise that her stockbroker, really charged with most of the charges, the same ones that Martha Stewart had been convicted of. And now it is confirmed that Judge Miriam Cedarbaum has sentenced Peter Bacanovic to five months in prison and five months of home confinement.
LIN: Mary, do you know yet...
SNOW: When we get some more details -- OK.
LIN: All right. I'm just wondering if you have any color yet. Did he talk in the courtroom? Martha Stewart made her statement earlier today before the judge.
SNOW: We do not have word yet about the color and what happened. We're going to go and check with our colleagues inside the courtroom...
LIN: OK.
SNOW: ... and get them back to you as soon as we can.
LIN: All right. Had to ask, Mary. Thanks very much. We'll get right back to you as soon as you get some more.
SNOW: Sure.
LIN: Right now, we want to bring back our legal guest, Jeffrey Jacobovitz. He's a trial attorney, lots of experience as a criminal defense attorney.
Jeffrey, what do you make of the sentencing?
(CROSSTALK)
JEFFREY JACOBOVITZ, TRIAL ATTORNEY: It's not unusual at all. I'm sorry to interrupt. It's a very equitable sentence in light of the fact of what Martha Stewart received.
We had predicted that that probably would be the sentence. It's a 10-month sentence, a split sentence, with five months home confinement, five months in prison. We haven't heard yet from Mary whether in fact the judge is staying the sentence pending appeal, allowing Bacanovic to appeal his sentence. Most likely, she will, and...
LIN: Jeffrey?
JACOBOVITZ: Yes?
LIN: I'm going to interrupt you. Excuse me. We want to take advantage of your legal experience, but first I need to go back to Mary Snow, who's got more information.
Mary, what have you heard?
SNOW: Carol, we don't yet know about staying the sentence, but one of the other things that Judge Miriam Cedarbaum has sentenced Peter Bacanovic to is a $4,000 fine. Martha Stewart had been fined $30,000, Peter Bacanovic fined $4,000. So very similar sentencing, except for that monetary quotient there.
LIN: All right.
Jeffrey, continue on. A $4,000 fine, not much money really.
JACOBOVITZ: Right. It's negligible compared to what the charges were, and particularly in light of what his attorneys' fees probably were. But the sentences are very parallel, and it's not unusual in this scenario.
LIN: You're not surprised then. Because we had talked earlier about his culpability, the fact that he initiated the call to Martha Stewart.
JACOBOVITZ: Right, but here we have the two defendants getting convicted of essentially the same offenses. And because of the leniency in Stewart's sentencing, it would have been unusual for the judge to not to be lenient as well for Bacanovic. I wouldn't -- well, I would be surprised if Bacanovic doesn't appeal. He will appeal, most likely, and ask for that stay in the sentence.
LIN: All right. You know -- I mean, I have to make a point that the charges are not related to insider trading, which is what it may sound like with my question to you. I'm just wondering whether the judge takes into account the circumstances around the obstructions of justice, the -- the lying charges. But clearly, she stuck straight to the book.
JACOBOVITZ: Well, that's an interesting question, because there was a recent Supreme Court decision called Blakely (ph) which really restricts federal judges from considering issues outside of the indictment in terms of what the sentence should be. The judge does consider everything, though. And it could be the judge is sending a message as well that they were convicted, these are serious charges, but these aren't charges like Enron and those types of charges, where people are spending extraordinary amount of times in jail.
LIN: How much of a difference does it make that Martha Stewart in her appeals process is spending a lot of money, big bucks on a high-profile appellate lawyer specializing in appeal cases? Peter Bacanovic may not have those resources to do the same.
JACOBOVITZ: He may not. But, in fact, he has the same issues, and so he could essentially get a free ride off of what Martha Stewart's lawyers are doing, because his attorneys will probably join in the same appeal.
LIN: Hold that thought, Jeffrey. Going back to Mary Snow for more breaking news out of the courthouse.
Mary, what do you have?
SNOW: Carol, we're getting more details about what happened at the sentencing. Peter Bacanovic did speak, telling Judge Miriam Cedarbaum, "I deeply regret the sorrow and pain this case has caused my family and friends." And he called this "a horrible ordeal for my family and friends."
So Peter Bacanovic speaking before Judge Miriam Cedarbaum before he was sentenced. That sentence, five months in prison, five months home confinement, $4,000 fine, very similar sentence to Martha Stewart -- Carol.
LIN: Mary, are you expecting Peter Bacanovic to exit in the same manner, come to the microphones, talk to the reporters?
SNOW: Well, he'll exit in the same man manner. The big question, though, is, will he speak to reporters?
He has been very low key. Talking to some of his representatives beforehand, they were not sure whether or not he was going to make a statement.
That's one of the stark contrasts between him and Martha Stewart, where Martha Stewart has been out and about, seen publicly. She's even spoken a couple of times since her conviction. Peter Bacanovic has pretty much really been very low key, and not sure whether he's going to speak to reporters.
LIN: Has he been working at all?
SNOW: From what we know and what we've read about, with friends of his quoting -- there was a story in "The New York Times" yesterday. It seems that he was spending a lot of time in California with some of his friends. And it doesn't appear that he had been working. You know, he was barred from the securities industry now obviously because of what has happened with the ImClone stock.
LIN: Right, because he was the stockbroker to the stars out there in the Hamptons. He circulated amongst the same crowds as Martha Stewart.
SNOW: He really was seen on the social circuit, and his name was certainly known. And, you know, in talking to people who know him, he certainly seemed to have a very large circle of friends, had a very good reputation, but was very successful at Merrill Lynch.
One of his other clients obviously was Sam Waksal. And that fateful day, December 27th of 2001, when Sam Waksal had called Peter Bacanovic's office, Peter Bacanovic was on vacation. But Waksal wanted to dump his stock. And the center of this case really focused on what happened in that day, and days after, and what Bacanovic had told investigators, as well as Martha Stewart, in terms of what had happened.
They had always said that they had an agreement to sell the stock once it fell below a certain price, but prosecutors have alleged that it was a cover-up. And one of the most damaging -- the most damaging evidence against him was his assistant, Doug Faneuil, who testified against him and cooperated with prosecutors.
LIN: All right. Thanks, Mary, very much. We'll get back to you as soon as you learn more. If you see Peter Bacanovic at the microphone, let us know.
Jeffrey Jacobovitz, our special guest, are you still with us?
JACOBOVITZ: I'm with you.
LIN: What do you make of what's going to happen next now? What's going to happen in the appeals process? And will it be different for Peter Bacanovic than it will be for Martha Stewart?
JACOBOVITZ: Well, Carol, after what you said, maybe he should go to jail and write a book "Stockbroker to the Stars."
LIN: That may be the only career available to him at this point.
JACOBOVITZ: That's right, although he only has five months to do it. I think that at this point the appeal process will begin. The process generally takes approximately a year, and that's why Bacanovic will most likely be out on the street during this time period, because otherwise it eviscerates his sentence if in fact he's in jail during this time period.
He will begin the appeals process. After a year, if the -- if the second circuit does not overturn the verdict, most likely they will appeal to the Supreme Court and try to get what's called granting cert (ph). It's probably unlikely that the Supreme Court would hear this, and then they would have to begin their sentences if, in fact, he...
LIN: So you're saying a couple of years. It could be a couple of years then?
JACOBOVITZ: It could be at least a year and a half, that's right.
LIN: OK. All right. Interesting. Well, as our Jeffrey Toobin has said, nobody's in a hurry to go to prison.
JACOBOVITZ: That's right.
LIN: So we'll watch closely during the appeals process. Thanks very much, Jeffrey.
JACOBOVITZ: Thank you.
LIN: Betty?
NGUYEN: For those of you just joining us, do want to tell you that Peter Bacanovic, Martha Stewart's stockbroker, has been sentenced to a term that's very similar, exactly the same as Martha Stewart's, five months prison, two years probation, five months home confinement.
We want to go now to CNN's Mary Snow, who is standing outside the courthouse.
The only thing that differs here is the fine. Talk to us to about Peter's fine -- Peter Bacanovic's fine.
SNOW: Yes, Betty. The fine is $4,000 for Peter Bacanovic. It was $30,000 for Martha Stewart. But in terms of the sentence, as you said, five months in prison, five months home confinement.
And, you know, up until today, Betty, Martha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic had been in the same courtroom trial throughout. Now, their sentencing had been separate.
Peter Bacanovic, though, like Martha Stewart, got up in court before Judge Miriam Cedarbaum, saying, "I deeply regret the sorrow and pain that this case has caused my family and friends," calling it "a horrible ordeal for my family and friends."
Also, one of the things that the judge took into consideration in sentencing Bacanovic was 200 letters that were sent on his behalf. And we know from Martha Stewart's case, Judge Cedarbaum said that she read every one of the 1,500 letters that she received on Martha Stewart's behalf.
She's a very deliberate judge, and really taking every piece of evidence and every piece of document that comes before her, going through it very thoroughly. So that was one of the things taken into consideration when she made this decision -- Betty.
NGUYEN: Let's talk a little bit about the timeframe here, when Martha Stewart went for her sentencing. It happened very quickly. But this took a little bit longer, yet it's the same sentence. What are you hearing as to what went on inside that courtroom and why it took so long? SNOW: Well, Betty, we're still waiting for some of the details to come out. But one thing that we could perhaps speculate on is one big thing that happened in between the conviction and today was the fact that a U.S. Secret Service agent was charged with perjury in his testimony. And that Secret Service agent really was testifying about Peter Bacanovic, because he had testified about a document that belonged to Bacanovic, as prosecutors were trying to make their case that Bacanovic altered that document that showed Martha Stewart's stock sale.
So that was seen, obviously, as a very big development since the conviction. And, of course, the case was made for a new trial, which the judge rejected. But perhaps the lawyers were talking about the possible appeal that they are planning. That is certainly a very big component since it dealt directly with Peter Bacanovic.
NGUYEN: Both are looking for an appeal. In the Martha Stewart case, her attorneys asked for her to go to Danbury, Connecticut, where there's a prison there close to her home. In this case, Bacanovic, where are you expecting him to go?
SNOW: That's a good question, Betty. In terms of the requests that his lawyers have made, we have not gotten word yet about the specific facility where they are requesting.
Once we do know -- what we do know is that the Bureau of Prisons usually sentences somebody to 500 miles within the radius of their home in New York, and that is usually the guidelines. But my colleague, Allan Chernoff, has just gotten out of the courtroom, so I'm going to throw it back to you. And he'll be here in a second just to give you more details.
NGUYEN: Absolutely. Fast-moving developments in this sentencing today.
Right now, we want to turn it over to Carol with the latest -- Carol.
LIN: All right, Betty. Just want to bring people back up to date that we just heard about the sentencing of Peter Bacanovic, who is Martha Stewart's stockbroker, who had tipped her off to sale of ImClone stock by the chairman of that company. It enabled her to sell her stock early before the stock plunged. But now they had obstructed the investigation by lying to the investigators, and that is what both have been found guilty of and sentenced -- both sentenced to five months in prison, five months home confinement.
Different fines. Martha Stewart getting $30,000, Peter Bacanovic getting $4,000. We're waiting to see if he comes to the microphones. But in the meantime, the atmosphere in the courtroom must have been electric as this case finally starts winding down, coming to a close. Our Allan Chernoff was inside.
Allan, was there a reaction by Peter Bacanovic when he heard the sentence? ALLAN CHERNOFF, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Peter Bacanovic, immediately after hearing the sentence, after the proceeding was all over, turned. You could clearly see a smile on his face.
He gave a big hug and a kiss to his mom and then to his dad, and also other supporters in the room. Clearly, quite relieved that he also had received the minimum sentence, being five months in prison and then five months of home detention. So clearly, quite a bit of relief for Peter Bacanovic, the former stockbroker to Martha Stewart.
LIN: What about the statement that he made to the judge and how he spoke? What was his demeanor? What was the sense and the feeling he was trying to get across?
CHERNOFF: Peter Bacanovic was very calm, as he was through the entire trial, almost stone-faced. He did speak very briefly before the judge, saying that he was so sorry for all the -- the trouble this had brought to his family and to his friends. But the vast majority of the proceeding was really dominated by his attorney, Richard Strasbourg (ph), who spoke for nearly 30 minutes, praising Mr. Bacanovic, repeatedly referring to the approximately 250 letters that had been written on his behalf, one of the letters describing Peter as the "closest thing to an angel on this Earth."
LIN: Good grief.
CHERNOFF: Several letters from people who knew -- knew Peter very well and described acts of kindness by Peter. One woman who had lost her husband in an auto accident, Peter had flown out, taken care of the woman, taken her to dinner, really gone out of his way.
Somebody, frankly, who was described as someone he wasn't particularly close with, but nonetheless had really made an effort. So Richard Strasbourg (ph), his attorney, spent a long time describing Peter as a kind person, a man with a very big heart.
LIN: Yes. Allan, we are looking at a double-shot here both of you and the courthouse steps. We are waiting for Peter Bacanovic to come out. We see some people coming out, his parents coming down the courthouse steps.
I don't know, Allan, if you have a monitor there. We're waiting for Peter Bacanovic to come out. Can you describe who some of those people are?
CHERNOFF: Right. It looks to me that that's -- those are his parents right there, his father in the middle, and I believe to the left -- I'm not sure, frankly, if that is his mom.
LIN: Where is he right now?
CHERNOFF: But the father in the middle there.
LIN: Where is Peter Bacanovic right now?
CHERNOFF: Well, Peter Bacanovic would still be in the courtroom. I mean, the proceedings finished only minutes ago. So I don't believe he's -- he stepped out just yet.
And keep in mind, the proceedings today were on the third floor of the courtroom. So it does take -- of the courthouse, so it does take a little bit to get outside.
LIN: Did you see as Bacanovic's attorney was making this, you know, character reference for Peter Bacanovic, talking about what a wonderful guy he was, could you see any reaction by the judge? Obviously, for the attorney to go on for 30 minutes about different character witnesses for Peter Bacanovic, he wanted to impress the judge to influence either the sentence -- final sentencing or even the possible appeal down the road.
CHERNOFF: Judge Cedarbaum listened very intently, certainly gave the courtesy to Peter Bacanovic. During the trial itself, the judge repeatedly had expressed annoyance with Mr. Bacanovic's defense attorneys, who did tend to go on and on, particularly the co-council, Richard Strasbourg (ph). But in this situation, the judge was certainly patient, certainly quite willing to hear it all out. She did briefly mention, though, that she had read all of those letters very carefully.
LIN: Do you think -- was it your sense that it had an influence in her decision, that he got the minimum sentence?
CHERNOFF: Yes, without question. The judge did say that it is quite clear you have been a person who has been extremely kind, was giving of himself. So it seems that the judge, in fact, certainly did have some sympathy.
And I think also the judge recognized that these were letters written by people who personally know Peter Bacanovic. Now, earlier today, of course, we heard about the 1,500 letters written to the judge on behalf of Martha Stewart. But clearly, many of those letters written by people who perhaps don't really know Martha Stewart personally but have been perhaps influenced by Ms. Stewart.
LIN: So is there a stay on the sentence right now during the appeal?
CHERNOFF: Yes, there is. The judge said that she would permit that. And it seems that there would be such an appeal. But we don't know the details of what the Bacanovic team is planning just yet. Martha Stewart's team has been very public, very vocal with all of its plans, of course.
LIN: Right. Right. Allan, you've watched this case from pretty much the beginning, and now to the end. Give me some of your impressions. Were you surprised?
CHERNOFF: Certainly not surprised that the verdict had come down against Martha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic. There was even, in the words of the judge, overwhelming evidence. And the defense was minimal. It really appeared that the defense had miscalculated in thinking that it did not need to put on all that much of a case. But in terms of the sentencing itself, the guidelines had prescribed 10 months to 16 months. And the judge clearly did move to the -- the most lenient side of that.
LIN: Right.
CHERNOFF: And I don't think all that many people had necessarily predicted that, although Judge Cedarbaum does have a reputation for not being a particularly harsh judge in terms of sentencing.
LIN: All right. Thanks very much, Allan. Keep an eye on those courthouse steps behind you. We're waiting to see if Peter Bacanovic speaks to reporters, as we heard and saw that Martha Stewart did so earlier, expressing a lot of emotion, frustration, anger at the whole process of the court proceedings over the last two years.
We want to bring back our legal guest, Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a trial attorney who has a lot of experience in criminal defense.
Jeffrey, you were just listening to Allan Chernoff describe the emotional, impassioned and lengthy testimony by Bacanovic's attorney to the judge, reading letters of testimony, different people contributing to some sort of character betrayal, just that Peter was a good guy. He tried to help people in need, people in trouble.
How much of an influence do you think that had on the minimum sentencing, or do you think the judge came into the courtroom with her mind made up?
JACOBOVITZ: I think the judge's mind was made up going into the courtroom. It's hard to tell, but generally that's what happens.
What I found significant, though, was the fact that Bacanovic made a statement to the court and showed a lot of remorse. And I think the judge did accept that.
The other thing that was significant with what Allan said was the judge found that there was overwhelming evidence. And that is important when it comes time for the appeal, because, frequently, circuit courts, appellate courts find that any errors are harmless, and, in fact, the defendant would have been convicted anyway. So that's an important statement by the judge.
LIN: All right. Thanks very much, Jeffrey.
I'm going to turn it over to Betty.
NGUYEN: We want to go now to CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin to talk about this sentencing.
Jeffrey, are you surprised at all? I mean, they were charged with the same thing and got the same sentence, it appears.
TOOBIN: Almost -- almost identical crimes, almost identical sentences. So I guess you can't be too surprised. What was interesting was that there were factors that pushed Judge Cedarbaum in different directions, as regard to Peter Bacanovic. At one level, just to state the obvious, he's a much smaller fish. He's not famous, he's not prominent. He is not the reason this case was brought.
So that would argue perhaps for a lesser sentence than Martha Stewart. But if you follow the facts of the case, Peter Bacanovic actually engaged in more criminal activity than Martha Stewart did. It was his betrayal of his trust as a stockbroker that caused him to call Martha Stewart in the first place and improperly tell her that Martha -- that Sam Waksal was selling his shares. And, that he not only lied to investigators, he tried to get his assistant, Douglas Faneuil, to lie as well.
So she was pushed in two directions, less harsh because he's not so prominent, more harsh because he engaged in more conduct. As a result, understandably, she basically -- she just gave him essentially the same sentence as Martha Stewart.
NGUYEN: Senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, we thank you for that. And that's about going to do it for us here in Atlanta for LIVE FROM. But "INSIDE POLITICS" is next, so you want to stay tuned. A lot of news to tell you about today.
Thanks for joining us.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
