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