5 Shocking Ways Martha Stewart Is Still Criticizing Prosecutors 20 Years After Her ImClone Scandal

The iconic Martha Stewart has once again thrust her 2004 insider trading case back into the spotlight, and her comments are more scathing than ever. As of December 2025, the domestic doyenne is leveraging a new platform—the recent Netflix documentary *Martha*—to air decades of grievances, specifically targeting the federal prosecutors she believes unfairly used her as a celebrity "trophy" to advance their careers. Her fresh, unfiltered criticism focuses heavily on the lead prosecutor, James Comey, whose subsequent high-profile career has only intensified her feeling of being selectively prosecuted. The renewed attention on the *ImClone* stock trading scandal reveals Stewart’s enduring bitterness over her conviction for lying to federal investigators and obstruction of justice. While the original case is two decades old, Stewart’s powerful platform and the current relevance of figures like Comey ensure her critiques are not just historical footnotes but fresh news, sparking new debates about prosecutorial overreach and celebrity justice in the United States.

The Key Players: Martha Stewart and the Prosecutors

The core of the controversy involves a handful of powerful figures whose careers were irrevocably linked by the high-stakes legal drama of the early 2000s.

Martha Stewart (The Defendant)

• Full Name: Martha Helen Kostyra (Stewart is her married name).
• Born: August 3, 1941, in Jersey City, New Jersey.
• Career: Founder of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (MSLO), a media and merchandising empire focused on homemaking, cooking, and entertaining.
• The Case: Convicted in March 2004 of felony charges of conspiracy, obstruction of an agency proceeding, and two counts of making false statements to federal investigators.
• Sentence: Served five months in federal prison (FPC Alderson, West Virginia) and five months of home confinement, followed by two years of supervised release.

James Comey (Lead Prosecutor)

• Role in Case: U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) at the time of the indictment. He oversaw the prosecution team.
• Subsequent Career: Deputy Attorney General of the United States (2003–2005) and Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (2013–2017).
• Stewart’s Criticism: She accuses Comey of using her case as a "trophy" to boost his career, a common critique of high-profile, celebrity prosecutions.

Michael Schachter (Trial Prosecutor)

• Role in Case: Assistant U.S. Attorney who delivered the closing arguments against Stewart.
• Current Status: Nationally renowned trial lawyer and white-collar defense attorney at Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP.
• Stewart’s Criticism: Schachter was the face of the prosecution in the courtroom, methodically laying out the case that Stewart and her broker, Peter Bacanovic, conspired to lie about the stock sale.

Peter Bacanovic (Stewart's Broker)

• Role in Case: Stewart's Merrill Lynch broker who relayed the non-public information about ImClone stock.
• The Case: Convicted alongside Stewart on the same charges.
• Sentence: Served five months in prison and five months of home confinement.

The "Trophy" Argument: Why Stewart Believes She Was Singled Out

Stewart’s primary, and most enduring, criticism is that the entire prosecution was an exercise in selective justice, driven by the ambition of the prosecutors, specifically James Comey. She has repeatedly stated that federal authorities targeted her because her celebrity status made her an ideal "trophy" to showcase the government's commitment to prosecuting white-collar crime. The underlying transaction involved Stewart selling 3,928 shares of ImClone Systems stock on December 27, 2001, just one day before the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced it had refused to review ImClone's cancer drug application, causing the stock price to plummet. She avoided a loss of approximately $45,673. The key legal distinction, which fuels Stewart’s criticism, is that she was ultimately *not* charged with insider trading itself. The most serious securities fraud charge was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum. Instead, she was convicted for the subsequent cover-up: lying to the FBI and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) about the reason for the sale and obstructing the investigation. Critics of the prosecution, including Stewart, argue she was convicted of lying about something that wasn't, in itself, a crime—a classic case of the cover-up being worse than the alleged crime.

Five Enduring Criticisms Stewart Has Leveled Against the Prosecution

Stewart's recent comments, particularly those highlighted in the Netflix documentary, distill her long-held resentment into five key areas of attack against the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) prosecutors.

1. The "Trophy" Hunting Allegation Against James Comey

Stewart’s most direct and recent attack is aimed at James Comey. She explicitly claims that Comey, then U.S. Attorney, saw her as a high-profile target—a "trophy"—whose conviction would elevate his career profile. This criticism is given new weight by Comey’s subsequent role as FBI Director and his involvement in other controversial, high-stakes investigations, which, in Stewart’s view, establishes a pattern of seeking the spotlight.

2. Overcharging and Misdirection of the Trial

Stewart and her defense team have long argued that the prosecution indicted her for lying but effectively tried her for insider trading. By focusing intensely on the details of the ImClone stock sale, the prosecutors, including Michael Schachter, painted a picture of guilt for the underlying act, even though the jury was technically deciding on the obstruction and false statement charges. This "bait-and-switch" tactic is a central point of her critique regarding the fairness of the trial.

3. The Disproportionate Nature of the Sentence

The five-month prison sentence, served at the notorious "Camp Cupcake" (FPC Alderson), is viewed by Stewart as a disproportionately harsh punishment for the specific crimes she was convicted of: lying to investigators. She maintains that the severity of the sentence was intended to send a message about white-collar crime, but the message was delivered unfairly using her as the example.

4. The Targeting of a Successful Female Entrepreneur

While not always explicit, an underlying theme in the criticism is the gendered nature of the prosecution. Stewart, a successful, self-made female CEO, was targeted for a crime that many lesser-known Wall Street figures commit without the same level of public scrutiny or prosecutorial zeal. This sentiment suggests a double standard in the pursuit of white-collar crime.

5. The Call for Accountability for Prosecutors

In one of her most inflammatory recent remarks, Stewart alluded to the idea that the prosecutors who "put her away" should face similar consequences. While the exact quote varies, the sentiment is clear: she believes the aggressive, career-driven nature of the prosecution was an abuse of power that should be scrutinized. This desire for accountability highlights her belief that the justice system failed to hold itself to the same standards it applied to her.

The Legacy of the ImClone Scandal and Stewart’s Resilience

Despite the conviction and prison time, Martha Stewart's career has seen a remarkable resurgence, a testament to her resilience and business acumen. She successfully rebranded herself from a disgraced corporate executive to a pop culture icon, collaborating with figures like Snoop Dogg and becoming the oldest cover model for *Sports Illustrated Swimsuit* at age 81. However, the shadow of the ImClone scandal remains a permanent fixture in her biography. Her current, fresh criticisms serve as a reminder that for Stewart, the case is not just a historical event but a deeply personal injustice. By labeling herself a "trophy" and calling out James Comey by name, Stewart ensures that the debate over prosecutorial ethics and the fairness of her trial continues to resonate in the modern media landscape. Entities like *ImClone Systems*, *Samuel Waksal* (the former CEO who provided the initial tip), *Merrill Lynch*, and the *SDNY* are forever linked to this pivotal moment in legal and business history. Her ability to keep this decades-old case relevant is a powerful demonstration of her enduring influence.