Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:23PM   Printer-friendly
from the what-a-shame dept.

It's 7 Years in Prison for Martin Shkreli, Convicted of Fraud

A federal judge sentenced former pharmaceutical executive and hedge-fund manager Martin Shkreli to seven years in prison Friday following his earlier conviction on three of eight counts of securities and wire fraud charges.

According to reporters present in the Brooklyn courtroom, Shkreli gave an emotional and tearful speech prior to his sentencing, taking blame and responsibility for his actions and saying he had changed as a person since his conviction. US District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto reportedly handed him a box of tissues and took a lengthy amount of time reviewing his transgressions and history.

The sentencing caps a long, public saga for Shkreli, who is widely reviled for drastically raising the price of a cheap, decades-old drug, as well as provocative and offensive online antics, including harassing women.

Obligatory Nelson HaHa

Source: ArsTechnica

Sobbing "Pharma Bro" Martin Shkreli Sentenced to 7 Years in Prison for Defrauding Investors

KSWB-TV reports

He was convicted on August 5, 2017 of securities fraud and conspiracy in what prosecutors said amounted to a Ponzi scheme. Shkreli called the charges "a witch hunt of epic proportions".

During his sentencing on Friday in Brooklyn federal court, Shkreli, 34, broke into tears and pleaded with the judge for leniency.

"I look back and I'm embarrassed and ashamed", he told the court. "I am terribly sorry", he said to his investors, "I lost your trust."

At his trial last year, Shkreli often wore a smirk and was chastised by the judge for his behavior, including for an incident in which he told reporters that the prosecutors on the case were "junior varsity". He also ignored the advice of his lawyer by commenting on the trial via social media and YouTube.

More coverage from:


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:35PM (48 children)

    He should have gotten more time in prison.

    What's worse is that he'll likely end up in club fed [wikipedia.org] rather than PMITA prison where he belongs.

    Sigh.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:48PM (44 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:48PM (#651060)

    From everything I've read about him, he really doesn't seem that bad. He just pissed off too many people (and the wrong people) with his irreverent attitude, but his crimes (the ones they convicted him of) seemed pretty minor, yet he's getting the book thrown at him, whereas countless banksters got away with outright fraud that trashed the US economy and no one's bothered prosecuting them. Basically he seems like a poster child for a justice system that makes an example of small fry while leaving the real criminals alone.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:57PM (9 children)

      whereas countless banksters got away with outright fraud that trashed the US economy and no one's bothered prosecuting them

      This jackass didn't get away with "outright fraud." He committed "outright fraud" and was convicted for it. The others you mention did get away with it. And that's wrong. There should be equality under the law.

      Which shouldn't mean convicting the flamboyant douchebags and not the gray and drab douchebags.

      But it also shouldn't mean letting off the flamboyant douchebags *because* the gray and drab douchebags got away with it.

      They should *all* spend some time behind bars and come out with sphincter control problems, IMHO.

      Sadly, no one over at DOJ asked my opinion. Or yours, apparently.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:19PM (8 children)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:19PM (#651081)

        I actually disagree: if you're going to consciously let a bunch of really bad crooks off scot-free for doing something extremely and demonstrably harmful, but you're going to roast a guy who committed small-fry fraud that didn't even hurt anyone, that isn't justice, it's a farce. Justice should be consistent, not capricious and arbitrary. If you're going to absolutely refuse to prosecute much worse criminals, then the correct course of action is to let the low-level guys off too.

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:25PM

          if you're going to consciously let a bunch of really bad crooks off scot-free for doing something extremely and demonstrably harmful,

          What are you going on about?

          Where did I say that? I'm not letting anyone off scot-free. I'm not the current (or any former) Attorney General. I'm not even a DOJ lawyer. Hell, I'm not even a lawyer?

          In fact, I said:

          They should *all* spend some time behind bars and come out with sphincter control problems, IMHO.

          So. I'm not sure who you're disagreeing with (perhaps the US DOJ?), but it isn't me. Try to keep things straight, okay?

          --
          No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
        • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:28PM (5 children)

          If you're going to absolutely refuse to prosecute much worse criminals, then the correct course of action is to let the low-level guys off too.

          It seems like you're saying that the rule of law [wikipedia.org] is not a good thing?
          Or am I misunderstanding you?

          --
          No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
          • (Score: 5, Insightful) by sjames on Sunday March 11 2018, @10:35PM (1 child)

            by sjames (2882) on Sunday March 11 2018, @10:35PM (#651095) Journal

            What we need is actual rule of law. Convict the drab douchebags too.

          • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Monday March 12 2018, @01:03AM (2 children)

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 12 2018, @01:03AM (#651152)

            No, quite the opposite. Rule of law means not ignoring big criminals just because they're politically connected. If you're going to ignore big criminals, then you really don't have true rule of law, so I feel it's immoral to even pretend. Since rule of law doesn't really exist for these financial crimes, it would be more fair to simply not prosecute anyone for them. Instead, what we have is capricious and arbitrary.

            • (Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Monday March 12 2018, @01:40AM (1 child)

              No, quite the opposite. Rule of law means not ignoring big criminals just because they're politically connected. If you're going to ignore big criminals, then you really don't have true rule of law, so I feel it's immoral to even pretend. Since rule of law doesn't really exist for these financial crimes, it would be more fair to simply not prosecute anyone for them. Instead, what we have is capricious and arbitrary.

              I agree completely, except with respect to not prosecuting folks.

              IANAL, nor am I privy to the data that the DOJ has concerning the big boys.

              However, given that those from the big financial houses (BOA, GS, AIG, etc. -- and don't even get me started on the "ratings" agencies), were likely far more protected via layers of managment, CYA maneuvers and "deniability." Making a winnable case against such folks would have been much harder.

              As such, I think it more likely that the DOJ (as they pretty much always do) protects their own asses by only prosecuting cases they know they can win.

              No. It's not fair. And yes, the DOJ should have more balls than that.

              But not prosecuting anyone just creates the wild, wild west. Is that how you want things to go?

              tl;dr: Just because the DOJ are a bunch of pussies who really only care about prosecuting cases they *know* they can win, doesn't mean we should give people a free pass. Rather, we should force the DOJ to do its job instead.

              --
              No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
              • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @02:55AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @02:55AM (#651181)

                DOJ are a bunch of pussies who really only care about prosecuting cases they *know* they can win

                It's even more elementary than that.
                These are folks looking to get together enough of a resumé so that they can cycle through the revolving door and get a cushy job with a big corporation.

                In the meantime, they don't want to piss off potential employers or the friends of those folks.

                -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

        • (Score: 2) by arcz on Monday March 12 2018, @04:55AM

          by arcz (4501) on Monday March 12 2018, @04:55AM (#651201) Journal
          I think it has more to do with whether or not the government has enough evidence to catch you. You can say someone did something illegal but where's your evidence? What law was broken? Bad result != illegal.
    • (Score: 1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:00PM (12 children)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:00PM (#651068) Homepage

      He was easy chum for Hillary in a period of time leading up to the 2016 election. Apparantly Hillary's political ghost still lives on in the American political system.

      Of course, he is a mega-douche of the highest order. He will be made an example, even though as others have already pointed out, there are many other more powerful people like him in other places jacking the prices of life-critical drugs and being ignored.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by Grishnakh on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:11PM

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:11PM (#651075)

        Yeah, nothing ever happened to Mylan for their EpiPen bullshit. But Shkreli wasn't even in trouble for Daraprim's pricing, that's just what made him so unpopular (and makes it seem like they went after him for something else just to please the masses).

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:12PM (8 children)

        by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:12PM (#651076) Journal

        This is modded Troll, but didn't he make a threat aggainst Hillary?

        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
        • (Score: 5, Informative) by black6host on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:44PM (6 children)

          by black6host (3827) on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:44PM (#651090) Journal

          He asked for someone to get him some hair from Hillary, with the follicles attached. The judge revoked his bail on the grounds he was soliciting assault (in essence, the actual wording may be different)

          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @10:42PM (5 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @10:42PM (#651097)

            When all eyes are upon you, it's better to just STFU. Mylan's CEO stayed out of the public eye and the storm blew over. Shkreli made a dumb joke, and that gave a judge an excuse to revoke his bail.

            • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday March 12 2018, @05:07PM (4 children)

              by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday March 12 2018, @05:07PM (#651429) Journal

              What Pharma Bro did was far worse than to simply make a dumb joke. It was offensive. It was perceived as a serious danger.

              He had an irreverent attitude. He failed to bow and act contrite.

              --
              People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
              • (Score: 3, Informative) by black6host on Tuesday March 13 2018, @12:14AM (3 children)

                by black6host (3827) on Tuesday March 13 2018, @12:14AM (#651590) Journal

                If you think for a second that a judge doesn't consider their courtroom their domain over which they exercise all control and that a judge doesn't demand respect from everyone in it then you haven't been to court much, lol. Sorry, I've spent several years in the civil system over a guardianship case. I learned a couple of things. When testifying, including cross examination, look the judge in the eye and speak to the judge. Not the attorney who asked the question. Second, unless you asked to speak then keep your mouth shut. Don't roll your eyes. Don't grunt when the opposition makes claims that are scandalous and lies. Suck it up and wait your turn. Now, IANAL I'm just relaying my personal experience.

                So, following all that, I won. I love testifying, I had the opposing attorney at a loss for words. He would ask me something and by the time I was done he was speechless.

                You are right though, I'm not saying you're not. But if someone is an asshole to the judge for the duration of the trial don't think for a second that the judge will forget that. Anyway, that's my 2 cents. (US personal experience, YMMV)

                • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday March 13 2018, @06:48PM (2 children)

                  by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 13 2018, @06:48PM (#651928) Journal

                  After following Groklaw daily for over ten years, I did know some of that.

                  --
                  People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
                  • (Score: 2) by black6host on Tuesday March 13 2018, @07:55PM (1 child)

                    by black6host (3827) on Tuesday March 13 2018, @07:55PM (#651962) Journal

                    I'm sure that you do. I didn't mean for my post to come across the way it did, sorry. Wish my knowledge had come that way instead of first hand :)

                    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 14 2018, @01:46PM

                      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday March 14 2018, @01:46PM (#652362) Journal

                      Wish my knowledge had come that way instead of first hand :)

                      That doesn't sound good. Sorry to hear it.

                      Everyone was aghast at SCO antics. But when anyone volunteered to go to court to take notes and write up a report of what happened, there would be warnings and explanations about how to dress and behave in court. Pay attention to the court's rules about recording devices, etc.

                      Groklaw was quite an education about the legal system. How slow it is. How it gives the bad buys way more rope than they deserve, even after years of stalling. That justice is often a coin flip. People thought SCO would go out with a big bang once everything came to light. After years of delaying and stalling and hiding their evidence, some flimsy evidence was eventually produced (after being ordered three times by the court, and after years!). By the time the trial was near, the court produced several rulings against SCO that were devastating to its case. Pulling the rug out from under it. Trial was to begin Monday Sept 17, 2007. On the Friday afternoon prior, SCO declared bankruptcy. (Bankruptcy fraud, because they were still solvent, they just didn't want to face the music.) Then we got years of watching the stench of how bankruptcy court works. It reeks to high heaven. Basically any real justice denied in the other court cases. The assets can go one direction and emerge squeaky clean, while the liabilities or potential liabilities go a different direction -- depriving anyone of any potential monetary judgement wins. Bankruptcy is supposed to either liquidate or reorganize, and fairly quickly. yet SCO remains in bankruptcy to this day. Next September 14 it will have been in bankruptcy for 11 years. There are no assets left. Just an administrative shell that continues to try its lawsuit against IBM. The courts now handling that are taking it slower than a snail in winter because there is no point. Maybe they just hope SCO will go away in bankruptcy. So it all ends with a fizzle instead of a bang.

                      --
                      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:10PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:10PM (#651108)

          I tried to be as inclusive as possible with my Original Submission. [soylentnews.org]
          (Things got trimmed for the S/N front page.)

          Al Jazeera mentioned that.

          -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

      • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:38PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:38PM (#651116)

        In my submission, I suggested the slimeball dept.
        Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich put up a page on this guy. [alternet.org]
        Shkleri's parents immigrated from Albania and busted their asses as common laborers.
        As soon as their USA-born son got out of school, he went crooked.

        Reich concludes with

        Face it: America has a Shkreli problem.

        Martin Shkleri will spend the next seven years of his life in prison. What will happen [to] the other unbridled narcissists now in positions of power in America, who also blatantly defy the common good?

        ...and as others have said in the (meta)thread, there are folks who got more severe (mandatory minimum) punishments for things that were less damaging to society.

        -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

        • (Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Monday March 12 2018, @04:32PM

          by Osamabobama (5842) on Monday March 12 2018, @04:32PM (#651406)

          Reich concludes with

          ... What will happen [to] the other unbridled narcissists now in positions of power in America, who also blatantly defy the common good?

          My guess is that they will mostly be re-elected.

          --
          Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:18PM

      Basically he seems like a poster child for a justice system that makes an example of small fry while leaving the real criminals alone.

      No. He's not a poster child for anything other than greed, sociopathy and self-pity for getting caught.

      The much more appropriate poster child for "making an example out of small fry" would be Abacus Federal Savings [wikipedia.org].

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Ramze on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:37PM (8 children)

      by Ramze (6029) on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:37PM (#651089)

      He stole from investors, lied to them about profits, lied about assets, and violated about a dozen SEC codes... then, he proceeded to mock the jury, the judge, the feds, his victims, a reporter... and then put a bounty on Hillary Clinton's hair -- which the secret service took as a real threat (she's still the wife of an ex-president).

      If he hadn't been lucky enough to profit from gambling the stolen money on other investments, his investors would have incurred real losses & there is still the possibility that the funds could have earned them more money if they'd been invested properly.

      Just because he returned the stolen money doesn't make it magically not fraud -- 3 counts of it by the way.

      Keep in mind that a simple drug dealer offering LSD at a club would get 15 years or more. He got 7 years... which means 6 months time served, 5 1/2 years left with "good time" in Federal prison... and possibly the last 6 months of that in a halfway house. So, he could be in a halfway house in 5 years. In the meantime, he'll try to get put into low or medium-low security prison where he can read books, teach classes, take courses himself, lift weights and play basketball. He got off EASY. The feds don't usually bother with cases that don't put people away for at least 10 to 15. Surprisingly, if he'd admitted guilt and gone with a plea deal, he likely would have gotten the same sentence! Oh, and you bet he'll appeal both his conviction and his sentencing in an effort to get out earlier. I imagine he'll even try to plead his case to Trump in the hopes of a pardon.

      Meanwhile, there's guys in federal prison serving 20 years for growing weed in their back yards. I get that there's a lot of crooks who have done worse, but they get to hide behind companies and other fall-guys and teams of lawyers. It's hard to convict CEOs because there's many layers of responsibility... but, there's at least a lot of laws regarding signing off on fraudulent investment statements... b/c then, you're messing with rich people's money. Can't have that!

      • (Score: 1) by realDonaldTrump on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:56PM

        by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:56PM (#651121) Homepage Journal

        Our Secret Service does a terrific job. And they protect the major presidential candidates -- the biggest Dem & Republican ones -- that ask for protection. Ever since that thing that one of our Second Amendment people did to Bobby Kennedy. Very sad!

      • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday March 12 2018, @12:37AM (2 children)

        by Phoenix666 (552) on Monday March 12 2018, @12:37AM (#651133) Journal

        He stole from investors, lied to them about profits, lied about assets, and violated about a dozen SEC codes...

        For the uninformed that is par for the course with hedge funds. Bernie Madoff and Shkreli are not unusual at all. Hedge funds can get away with it because they are deemed "private investment clubs" and are not subject to audit the way mutual funds are. That means they can tell you their returns are whatever they want, and you have no way to independently verify that. They generally operate like ponzi schemes, hoping to suck in enough marks before the bottom falls out.

        --
        Washington DC delenda est.
        • (Score: 1, Troll) by linuxrocks123 on Monday March 12 2018, @01:21AM (1 child)

          by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Monday March 12 2018, @01:21AM (#651159) Journal

          [citation really needed]

          I know they're not subject to the same audit rules; that doesn't mean they're all frauds.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @02:45AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @02:45AM (#651179)

            Hedge funds are all based on algorithms and those are proprietary.

            ...and even if you suspect you've been cheated, it would be pointless to sue them.
            Beyond the office furnishings, there are no actual material assets.
            It's all smoke and mirrors.

            -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

      • (Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Monday March 12 2018, @09:32AM (3 children)

        by PiMuNu (3823) on Monday March 12 2018, @09:32AM (#651265)

        He lied on a bunch of forms. Sure, it was illegal and some pension funds/other investors could have been harmed but weren't. But he will lose 5 years of his life for that, i.e. about 1/20th of his total existence on earth. That is a significant punishment I think.

        • (Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday March 13 2018, @03:02AM (2 children)

          by sjames (2882) on Tuesday March 13 2018, @03:02AM (#651650) Journal

          People have received more for growing the wrong plant in their living room.

          • (Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday March 14 2018, @12:51PM (1 child)

            by PiMuNu (3823) on Wednesday March 14 2018, @12:51PM (#652329)

            > People have received more for growing the wrong plant in their living room.

            I argue that is an issue with laws surrounding horticulture.

            • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday March 14 2018, @10:59PM

              by sjames (2882) on Wednesday March 14 2018, @10:59PM (#652658) Journal

              Personally, I would agree that the plants shouldn't even be illegal, but it does show a comparison in punishments. The gardener puts nobody at at risk (including financial risk).

              Shkreli put people at a financial risk they never agreed to and it is only by luck that he didn't wipe them out.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Sunday March 11 2018, @10:49PM (4 children)

      by sjames (2882) on Sunday March 11 2018, @10:49PM (#651100) Journal

      From everything I've read about him, he really doesn't seem that bad.

      Perhaps what they actually tried him for wasn't that bad compared to others, but given his other actions and his general attitude towards everyone who wasn't him, I wouldn't want him as a neighbor.

      The sad part isn't that he was convicted, the sad part is that the others didn't get put on trial.

      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 12 2018, @12:54AM (3 children)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 12 2018, @12:54AM (#651144)

        but given his other actions and his general attitude towards everyone who wasn't him, I wouldn't want him as a neighbor.

        I wouldn't mind at all, as long as he keeps his place neat and doesn't make any noise. I never talk to my neighbors. I've seen no indication that Shkreli would be a nuisance neighbor, in fact probably quite the opposite; I'd probably never have to hear barking dogs, domestic fights, honking horns, screaming kids (who vandalize cars), etc. from his place like I have with some neighbors.

        As for his general attitude, yeah, that would make me not want to be his good buddy, but that's not something to imprison someone over. People are allowed to be jerks.

        The sad part isn't that he was convicted, the sad part is that the others didn't get put on trial.

        Yeah, that's why I think this was a farce.

        • (Score: 2) by sjames on Monday March 12 2018, @01:00AM (1 child)

          by sjames (2882) on Monday March 12 2018, @01:00AM (#651149) Journal

          Not so sure about the neighbor part. He strikes me as exactly the kind of person who wouldn't care if his party guests blocked your driveway or kept you up all night.

          • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 12 2018, @01:06AM

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 12 2018, @01:06AM (#651154)

            He strikes me as exactly the kind of person who wouldn't care if his party guests blocked your driveway or kept you up all night.

            Hmm... maybe. But in that case, it's pretty easy to just call the police. The things I complained about are things that the cops either ignore or can't do much about, because by the time they get there, it's over. Having an all-night party in most decent places will get the cops called on you and if they get called multiple times (and they witness the noise themselves) you're going to court.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by ilPapa on Monday March 12 2018, @05:08AM

          by ilPapa (2366) on Monday March 12 2018, @05:08AM (#651205) Journal

          As for his general attitude, yeah, that would make me not want to be his good buddy, but that's not something to imprison someone over. People are allowed to be jerks.

          He's not getting locked up for being a jerk. He's getting locked up for multiple felonies. Here's the criminal complaint against him:

          https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2015/comp-pr2015-282.pdf [sec.gov]

          For the record, we have hard-working people decent family people living in the US who've been here for decades who are being snatched off the street and deported. Any one of them is worth more to society than a parasite like Martin Shkreli.

          --
          You are still welcome on my lawn.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @12:35AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @12:35AM (#651132)

      I agree. He seems like a really nice guy.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @01:45AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @01:45AM (#651163)

        I agree. He seems like a really nice guy.

        Definitely. Too bad he's going to prison. Otherwise I'd love it if he'd fuck my sister.

        What a shame.

    • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday March 12 2018, @03:22PM (2 children)

      by LoRdTAW (3755) on Monday March 12 2018, @03:22PM (#651361) Journal

      Shkreli's downfall was his dick head personality and hubris. When was the last time you saw a bankster tweeting about buying one-of-a-kind rap albums and then threatening to smash it like a retarded child for the sole purpose of getting a twitter reaction? You don't because they arent retarded children.

      If Shkreli kept his fucking stupid mouth shut, didn't broadcast his life social media, and played the part of low key rich playboy then NONE of this would have happened.

      So lesson learned. If you have lots of money dont go around bragging about it and for the love of god dont act like a complete spoiled rich boy twat on social media. Just commit your financial crimes in silence and enjoy the profits.

      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 12 2018, @04:18PM (1 child)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 12 2018, @04:18PM (#651394)

        So lesson learned. If you have lots of money dont go around bragging about it and for the love of god dont act like a complete spoiled rich boy twat on social media. Just commit your financial crimes in silence and enjoy the profits.

        Yeah, that's kinda my point here. This guy shouldn't be treated any worse than others who commit financial crimes just because he's a dickhead, and those others shouldn't be getting away scot-free just because they keep a low profile. Justice is supposed to be blind, remember. That's why the statue of the lady with scales has a blindfold.

        • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday March 12 2018, @04:29PM

          by LoRdTAW (3755) on Monday March 12 2018, @04:29PM (#651404) Journal

          The squeaky wheel gets the grease. We just have to figure how how to make those other wheels start squeaking.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @07:22PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @07:22PM (#651482)

      Don't forget that little matter of jacking up the prices of (formerly) cheap, life-saving drug.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:54PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:54PM (#651062)

    So you have judged him that he should have more time in PITA prison. Interesting.

    What would be an appropriate sentence in your mind? Perhaps life? No parole? Why? Back up your reasoning with something more than 'sigh'. The terms of what he did is laid out in our laws 1-15 years. He got ~half. He committed securities fraud. Just being a douchebag does not warrant a life sentence. If it does which law book is that in?

    If you think the prison he is going to end up in is a cake walk. Perhaps you should read up on what going to prison is like. In the US it is fairly harsh. With inmate/guard violence fairly common and the guards looking the other way. Even for 'white collar' criminals which is what he is.

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:10PM (1 child)

      What would be an appropriate sentence in your mind? Perhaps life? No parole? Why? Back up your reasoning with something more than 'sigh'. The terms of what he did is laid out in our laws 1-15 years. He got ~half. He committed securities fraud. Just being a douchebag does not warrant a life sentence. If it does which law book is that in?

      I never said anything about a life sentence. I am aware of the sentence he faced (and the DOJ, in fact, asked for 15 years). I think he should have gotten the max (that self-same 15 years). As it is, he can shave at least a year off that with "good behavior."

      Oh, and for the record, I'm not in favor of life sentences, except in cases where it's pretty clear that the individual is clearly a danger to others and is unlikely to be rehabilitated (not that rehabilitation is on the agenda in US prisons. More's the pity). I'm also against the death penalty. Mostly because people are wrongfully convicted all the time, and if you execute someone and it turns out they were innocent of that crime, you can't release them once they're dead.

      What's more, I imagine that spending the rest of your life in a 6x9 box, with each day regimented and no expectation that will ever end except via the sweet release of death, would be much worse than just being killed.

      tl;dr: You made unwarranted assumptions about me. Don't put words in my mouth.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by SubiculumHammer on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:53PM

        by SubiculumHammer (5191) on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:53PM (#651118)

        Its mainly that white collar crime gets punished so much less harshly than a guy that steals your car, and people are tired of it.