Let’s examine the facts. Peter Bacanovic (said to have altered the sell-order document after the fact) was Martha’s co-defendant. This kept Martha from exercising her constitutional right to cross-examine him, since he had the right to remain silent. The prosecutor was permitted by U.S. District Judge Miriam Cedarbaum to make highly prejudicial references to Martha’s “insider tips” more than a dozen times, without the charge of insider trading ever being made, or properly presented to the jury. The judge also prevented Martha’s defense counsel from arguing that Martha had not been charged with insider trading, and was therefore legally innocent of that purported crime. Furthermore, one juror lied about being arrested for committing a gender-based crime, and an expert witness for the prosecution lied about examining the document that was allegedly altered! In addition, a recent Supreme Court appeal about restrictive sentencing threw out a state’s sentencing guidelines as unconstitutionally restrictive, casting legal doubt on the federal guidelines used to sentence Martha.

Martha has acknowledgd that there is a public misperception about her, because she is a business woman and a creator of domestic arts, an odd combination. “Sometimes I don’t always say, ‘Thank you’ enough, or pat enough people on the back,” she told Larry King during a recent interview. “But if I were a man, no one would say that I was arrogant!” There is definitely a double standard that is being exploited in the media. Not patting employees on the back each time they do well is standard practice for men in the corporate environment. A strong executive, woman or man, must stay focused on the next issue and expect perfection from everyone. This unfortunately leaves the impression of the “B word” in people’s minds, but being classified as such is not a crime. And that should not be the reason one is found guilty of lying to federal investigators.

Martha’s attorneys think she has a good chance to win on appeal. If she wins, and is thus no longer a felon, she will return to being Chairwoman of the Board. The civil suit pending with the S.E.C. may then become so weak that she could be offered a consent decree and a monetary settlement. Then boom, it’s over! As I have consistently predicted since the beginning of this imbroglio, Martha will be exonerated and spend not one second in jail. However, she still could decide to bite the bullet and just go and serve her short sentence, for the good of her company, and put this all behind her. Even Martha says she has not yet made up her mind. However, I don’t think she will choose to do this.

Martha is a fighter, the kind of individual who is not staying secluded inside one of her many homes, ashamed to be seen in public. “Lay low for two-and-one-half years?” she asked. “At this time of my life (she will soon turn 63), there are so many things I want to see and learn!” Martha’s strength and tenacity will see her through. She is now free to present her “own unique brand of strength under fire,” as one commentator desscribed it, to the public. And when given lemons, Martha is making lemonade. She has mused that she may soon write a self-help book, to pass along to the public all that she has learned about how to behave when under investigation, ranging from what to say, or not say, to what to wear.

For now, Martha is the public face of corporate scandal. She is the icon the public can most identify with. Whether justice will triumph or not remains to be seen. Meanwhile, look for our fair-haired neighbor, out and about this month in our Hamptons.