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:
Related Stories
Martin Shkreli continues to run business from prison, report says
Martin Shkreli reportedly runs his pharmaceutical company from prison on a contraband smartphone. Shkreli continues to run the remains of the drug company that once earned him the title of most hated man in America, according to a story in the Wall Street Journal. He was convicted of securities fraud and conspiracy in 2017. He has served 16 months of a seven-year sentence in federal prison.
Shkreli is reportedly running Phoenixus AG, formerly known as Turing Pharmaceuticals. In 2015, when Shkreli was the CEO, Turing raised the price of the lifesaving drug Daraprim used by AIDS patients from $13.50 a pill to $750 a pill. The price hike sparked a public outcry.
The Journal says that Shkreli anticipates the company will grow more successful while he's in prison. He believes the company, of which he owns 40%, could be worth $3.7 billion by the time he gets out of prison.
On one recent phone call, Shkreli fired Phoenixus CEO Kevin Mulleady, the Journal reported. Shkreli reportedly later changed his mind, agreeing to suspend Mulleady rather than fire him.
Cartoon villain performance art.
Previously: Martin Shkreli Points Fingers at Other Pharmaceutical Companies
Martin Shkreli Convicted of Securities Fraud Charges, Optimistic About Sentencing
Martin Shkreli Lists Unreleased Wu-Tang Clan Album on eBay
Martin Shkreli's $5 Million Bail Revoked for Facebook Post Seeking Hillary Clinton's Hair
Sobbing Martin Shkreli Sentenced to 7 Years in Prison for Defrauding Investors
Related: Drug Firm Offers $1 Version of $750 Turing Pharmaceuticals Pill
Mylan Overcharged U.S. Government on EpiPens
EpiPen Maker is Facing Shareholder Backlash
FDA Has Named Names of Pharma Companies Blocking Cheaper Generics [Updated]
U.S. Hospitals Band Together to Form Civica Rx, a Non-Profit Pharmaceutical Company
His early release reflects good behavior and completion of rehabilitation programs
Infamous ex-pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli has been released from federal prison after serving less than five years of a seven-year sentence for a securities and wire fraud conviction. He is now moving into a US Bureau of Prisons halfway house at an undisclosed location in New York until September 14, 2022.
Shkreli was convicted in August 2017 on two counts of securities fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud in connection to what federal prosecutors called a Ponzi-like scheme involving two hedge funds Shkreli managed. In March 2018, a federal judge sentenced him to seven years, which he was serving in minimum security federal prison in Allenwood, Pennsylvania.
His early release—slightly more than four years after his sentencing—reflects time shaved off for good behavior in prison, plus completion of education and rehabilitation programs, according to CNBC. It also includes a credit for the roughly six months he spent in jail prior to his sentencing.
Previously on SoylentNews:
United States Sells Unique Wu-Tang Clan Album Forfeited by Martin Shkreli
Judge Denies Shkreli's "Delusional Self-Aggrandizing" Plea to Get Out of Jail
Shkreli Stays in Jail; Infamous Ex-Pharma CEO Quickly Loses Appeal
Martin Shkreli Accused of Running Business From Prison With a Smuggled Smartphone
Sobbing Martin Shkreli Sentenced to 7 Years in Prison for Defrauding Investors
Britain Fines Pfizer Record £84.2m for 2600% Drug Price Hike
Daraprim Price Lowered in Response to Outrage
Cost of Daraprim Medication Raised by Over 50 Times
Infamous ex-pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli is yet again in trouble with the Federal Trade Commission, which announced today that the convicted fraudster has failed to cooperate with the commission's investigation into whether he violated his lifetime ban from the pharmaceutical industry by starting a company last year called "Druglike, Inc."
[...]
At the center of the dispute is whether Shkreli's co-founding of Druglike runs afoul of his lifetime ban from the pharmaceutical industry, which was in response to Shkreli's infamous move to raise the price of the cheap, life-saving anti-parasitic drug, Daraprim, from $17.50 a pill to $750 a pill in 2015.
[...]
The FTC also noted in its court filing that Shkreli has so far failed to pay any of the $64.6 million in disgorgement he was ordered to pay alongside his lifetime ban.
Previously:
Martin Shkreli Launches Blockchain-Based Drug Discovery Platform
Martin Shkreli Accused of Running Business From Prison With a Smuggled Smartphone
Sobbing Martin Shkreli Sentenced to 7 Years in Prison for Defrauding Investors
Martin Shkreli's $5 Million Bail Revoked for Facebook Post Seeking Hillary Clinton's Hair
Martin Shkreli Lists Unreleased Wu-Tang Clan Album on eBay
Martin Shkreli Convicted of Securities Fraud Charges, Optimistic About Sentencing
Martin Shkreli Points Fingers at Other Pharmaceutical Companies
Related:
U.S. Hospitals Band Together to Form Civica Rx, a Non-Profit Pharmaceutical Company
FDA Has Named Names of Pharma Companies Blocking Cheaper Generics [Updated]
EpiPen Maker is Facing Shareholder Backlash
Mylan Overcharged U.S. Government on EpiPens
Drug Firm Offers $1 Version of $750 Turing Pharmaceuticals Pill
In an effort to avoid being held in contempt of court, former pharmaceutical executive and convicted fraudster Martin Shkreli made an eyebrow-raising argument to a federal judge Friday, stating that his company Druglike, which he previously described as a "drug discovery software platform," was not engaged in drug discovery. As such, he argued he is not in violation of his sweeping lifetime ban from the pharmaceutical industry.
Last month, the Federal Trade Commission and seven states urged a federal judge in New York to hold Shkreli in contempt for allegedly failing to cooperate with an investigation into whether he violated the ban. The FTC said Shkreli failed to turn over requested documents related to Druglike and sit for an interview on the matter.
In the filing Friday, Shkreli claims that he responded to the FTC's requests "promptly and in good faith."
Previously:
FTC: Shkreli May Have Violated Lifetime Pharma Ban, Should be Held in Contempt
Martin Shkreli Launches Blockchain-Based Drug Discovery Platform
Shkreli Released From Prison to Halfway House After Serving <5 of 7 Years
Martin Shkreli Accused of Running Business From Prison With a Smuggled Smartphone
Sobbing Martin Shkreli Sentenced to 7 Years in Prison for Defrauding Investors
Martin Shkreli's $5 Million Bail Revoked for Facebook Post Seeking Hillary Clinton's Hair
Martin Shkreli Lists Unreleased Wu-Tang Clan Album on eBay
Martin Shkreli Convicted of Securities Fraud Charges, Optimistic About Sentencing
Martin Shkreli Points Fingers at Other Pharmaceutical Companies
Related:
"Pure and Deadly Greed": Lawmakers Slam Pfizer's 400% Price Hike on COVID Shots
U.S. Hospitals Band Together to Form Civica Rx, a Non-Profit Pharmaceutical Company
FDA Has Named Names of Pharma Companies Blocking Cheaper Generics [Updated]
EpiPen Maker is Facing Shareholder Backlash
Mylan Overcharged U.S. Government on EpiPens
Drug Firm Offers $1 Version of $750 Turing Pharmaceuticals Pill
(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
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:48PM (44 children)
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)
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)
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
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:
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)
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)
What we need is actual rule of law. Convict the drab douchebags too.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:19PM
I couldn't agree more. And when I get some more mod points, I'm modding you up.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Monday March 12 2018, @01:03AM (2 children)
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)
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]
(Score: 2) by arcz on Monday March 12 2018, @04:55AM
(Score: 1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:00PM (12 children)
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
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)
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)
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)
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)
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.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 3, Informative) by black6host on Tuesday March 13 2018, @12:14AM (3 children)
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)
After following Groklaw daily for over ten years, I did know some of that.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by black6host on Tuesday March 13 2018, @07:55PM (1 child)
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
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.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:10PM
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)
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
...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
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
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)
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
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)
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)
[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
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)
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)
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)
> 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
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)
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)
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)
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
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
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)
I agree. He seems like a really nice guy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @01:45AM
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)
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)
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
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
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)
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)
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
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.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:41PM (17 children)
He's going to find dozens of hundreds of people waiting for him at the gates of Hell when this is all over.
Know what I really want to see though? And what I'd even forego prison time for him entirely for? Strip him of all his assets, and put him out on the streets with nothing but the clothes on his back, and tell him to find work. He'll be dead inside a month, but it'll be the most horrible month of his life. Double bonus points if you infect him with something Daraprim treats first.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:57PM (14 children)
This is why we have laws. Not mob justice.
Yes what he did was terrible. But a death sentence? Does that not seem extreme? Considering what he did was basically raise prices to the insurance companies and gave it away for free to those who could not get insurance? That is more akin to fraud (which he is going to spend time in prison for).
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:01PM (12 children)
Hey, if ordinary law-abiding people suffer that for not committing any crime at all, it follows that it's at least as just for someone whose greed doubtlessly killed dozens of hundreds of people to suffer it. If you have a problem with that idea, ask yourselves why.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:08PM (6 children)
omeone whose greed doubtlessly killed dozens of hundreds of people to suffer it
Oh who? That is supposition and innuendo. You *think* he did these things. Maybe he even did. But his crime here is security fraud. When will they be bringing up the charges for murder? Not going to happen. Because no one died from it. I am not going to judge a man based on what I heard on the internet. You should ask *yourself* why you do that?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:25PM (5 children)
I have to admire your courage, other AC. You're not wrong. You're probably a better person than me.
Perhaps all of us need to remember that the only reason Shkreli could do what he did with drug prices is because healthcare in the US is fundamentally broken. It's neither capitalist nor socialist yet the worst of both worlds. Everybody who votes for the one DuR party (see what I did there? meme-able? not meme-able?) is to blame for this situation. The Libertarian and Green parties are on the ballot in most states. This November, I wish everybody would ask themselves, before they vote DuR team again, what they expect doing the same thing over and over again will ever change.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:56PM
[USA's healthcare is] neither capitalist nor socialist
Here's Socialism:
The collective ownership of the means of production by The Workers.
Even mentioning that word is a red herring.
...or maybe you can point to something in USA where it appears to apply to healthcare.
Here's a definition of Capitalism that I like:
A hierarchical economic system where The Working Class is exploited by a separate Ownership Class and is indoctrinated with the mantra "Always be maximizing profits for The Ownership Class".
That very much described USA's healthcare system.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by fyngyrz on Monday March 12 2018, @12:06AM (2 children)
They are. But they haven't been offering anything sufficiently better, so they have never gotten my vote. I bloody well wish they would. Capital-L libertarians almost always leave me shaking my head at their callous outlooks; lower-case libertarians are rarely on the ballot.
The green party has had some pretty severe problems too; for instance, until 2016, they were pushing homeopathy. From their then-planking:
Idiots.
Also: when there's someone like Trump on the ballot, I'm afraid that in order to be able to sleep at night, I have to vote for an opponent who has an actual chance of beating them.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Monday March 12 2018, @12:51AM (1 child)
Homeopathy is probably the correct treatment for hypochondria, and for any non-bacterial condition for which a patient is demanding antibiotics. The placebo effect is real, medicine should make use of it.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Monday March 12 2018, @01:34PM
No. It isn't. Homeopathy is largely (ideally entirely) outside the realm of normal medical procedure and personnel.
When you teach / encourage people to reach for homeopathic nostrums for whatever ails them, even when imaginary, then that's the path they will be familiar with and tend to lean towards. Then, when they are actually ill, they can end up without appropriate treatment and are considerably more likely to distribute disease to the rest of us.
If the process is one that encourages fake treatments like homeopathy, and/or the "treatment" sourced outside actual medical channels with no one but quacks and marketroids in the line of prescribing / dispensing treatment, then appropriate remediation for the real thing can all too often go by the wayside.
If someone thinks they are sick, they should see a doctor, not a shelf full of fake "remedies" marketed by the unscrupulous and/or stupid. The doctor, in turn should never mention homeopathy except in the context of "that is of no benefit to you, as it is absolutely without useful effect."
Lastly, hypochondria is not an illness that can be cured by dispensing placebos, regardless of the patient's temporary adjustment of mental state. Treatment for it should be referred to a psychiatrist, rather than just pushing the problem down the road with a fake treatment. The objective of quality medical treatment is to solve problems; not to pretend to solve them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @12:07AM
Neither of those is Anti-Capitalist.
As Capitalism is the problem with USA, the Green Party is only a baby step in a different direction.
The Libertarians are every bit as Capitalist as the Big 2, so, with them, there is no improvement WRT the root problem.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by realDonaldTrump on Monday March 12 2018, @12:06AM
It's called the 8th Amendment, Azuma. That one says we can't do the cruel and unusual punishments. Cruel is fine. Unusual is fine. Both, that's not fine, why? Very special!
Judge Roy Moore said something so interesting, he said let's repeal all the amendments after the first 10. But the 8th is a funny old one.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Monday March 12 2018, @05:05PM (3 children)
While you have identified a valid problem (that is, people ending up homeless) and proposed a way to make the situation more fair (removing disparity between outcomes for rich and poor), your solution makes the problem worse (bad outcomes for more people). We should actually want better.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday March 12 2018, @08:37PM (2 children)
I will tell you the same thing I told the principal in 7th grade: two wrongs may not make a right, but they can stop a third wrong, or a fourth wrong, or a hundredth wrong.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Tuesday March 13 2018, @06:07PM (1 child)
I can see how this might apply to a timely throat-punch, but I don't think the necessary feedback is strong enough in this case. Sure, the finance elite might take pause at doing anything that will put themselves out on the streets, but that wouldn't change the system that puts other people out on the streets.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday March 13 2018, @09:07PM
Those are two different problems.
Also, i think it would have more of a deterrent effect than you think, for the simple reason that white collar criminals, unlike for example a drunken murderer, are in possession of their rational faculties and are using them for long-term gain. This is also why I support the death penalty for heinous white collar crimes: it has a deterrent effect only to people who aren't desperate, impaired, and stupid.
If enough of these greedy motherfuckers were turfed out of their companies, publicly humiliated for what they did, stripped of all assets, and dropped off at the nearest homeless shelter with a new identity and forced to start from scratch, I bet you the good money I don't have we'd see a big drop in this shit right quick.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @10:57PM
I think they meant that regular people can do all right and still not win. And go broke while braking no laws. And with the safety net getting hammered are left many times with nothing. I saw this in the 2008 downturn. Within two months about 20 houses in our 220 house neighborhood were empty. Some maybe from illegal loans but doubtful all. Some lost it all due to no work. I rented a property to a guy and his wife that had this. They lost work and just left the house and moved. Found work and wanted to rent and this red flag came up in our credit check. He had a job and we chalked it up to bad luck. They never missed a payment in 3yrs. When there credit rebounded they left to buy a house. But pharma bro? He gets club med? I think that and all his worth goes to soup kitchens. Same for the bankers who cheat. Just a regular outcome we regular folks have to endure when we don’t do wrong.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @05:42AM (1 child)
"waiting for him at the gates of Hell"
What did he do that you think he deserves that? How do you know what will happen when this is all over? WHAT is all over?
"Strip him of all his assets, and put him out on the streets with nothing but the clothes on his back, and tell him to find work."
He will be rich again in six months or less. And he will be around, mocking you. He will learn to play the game and will not go to prison for anything again.
He is only a bit spoiled by his own abilities. The system made sure to make an example of him. I don't believe he went to prison for securities fraud. He went to prison for the Hillary's hair. The Hillary is a dangerous creature as we all know and is a psychopath of the highest order. That creature would start a world war and be proud of it.
And YOU are a mobster.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday March 12 2018, @08:43PM
First of all, my girlfriend has *been* to Hell, and not as a tourist. She has between-life memories. Apparently last time she was a murderous, arsonous bandit, and as she was a Buddhist at the time, her Hell manifested the way Buddhists believe it would. Second, I am (and in fact nearly all pre-Nicene Christians who could speak Koine Greek were) what would be considered a Universalist. Hell is a state of being, not a place, and it lasts precisely as long as it needs to last. Third, fuck you for justifying Shkreli's actions with your bullshit social Darwinism. Fourth, I'm not anywhere Italian enough to be a mobster, though I *do* make some pretty good penne all'arrabiatta.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Insightful) by black6host on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:51PM (2 children)
I bet his sobbing was for poor Martin. I would be surprised if his attorney didn't tell him to do something to appear apologetic and tug on some heart strings. Leopards don't change their spots, so I'd be hard pressed to think that he truly learned his lesson and that the tears sprang from the wellspring of his remorse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:04PM
By a bunch of B?Cs whose mothers had died due to his pharma pricing antics.
Then we might finally have mob justice done for the people.
Also maybe he would come out of prison being truly remorseful, if not rehabilitated, if only for the pounding his poor anus took due to his amoral actions.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Monday March 12 2018, @12:43AM
I reckon you're right. Psychopaths can simulate human emotion when they need to. It's part of what makes them so deleterious to humans. Sometimes their eyes give it away, but most people aren't expert enough at reading micro-expressions to tell, and they are socialized to give others the benefit of the doubt.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:11PM (6 children)
That's fake news, Duca tweeted disparaging comments with a photo she took of Shkreli at a public bar. Shkreli responded by mocking her, including the DM invite and photoshopping himself into an image from her twitter profile. I thought it amusing but the official narrative is that he "harassed" her and it is wrong. In fact it's the reverse, Duca played the victim card to bully him off twitter.
Shkreli is enough of an asshole without accusing him of stuff he didn't do!
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Sunday March 11 2018, @10:56PM (5 children)
How does anything you said, 'make it fake news' ?
Even if we take this at face value, "Duca tweeted disparaging comments with a photo she took of Shkreli at a public bar."
So what? A single photo of a celebrity with a disparaging comment is definitely not 'harassment'.
What Shkreli did in response was harassment.
"Duca played the victim card" by being the victim? Yeah, God forbid people who are victimized complain about it.
You seem to be arguing that the victim deserved it because... reasons. wtf?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @11:23PM (4 children)
Really? What possible reason did Lauren Duca have for tweeting this? [twitter.com] Nothing creepy about that at all? Man visits restaurant - SO. FUCKING. WHAT?
Is there a public interest reason for a journalist tweeting that picture along with the subjects location? The only one I can think of is that Martin Shkreli is universally reviled and undoubtedly the recipient of communications that would constitute threats against the person. As if taking targeted creep shots of individuals in the public eye and posting them to social media does not constitute stalking and harassment?
To suggest that this [twimg.com] is anything other than mockery and humor is completely ridiculous. It's as ridiculous as pretending that Lauren Duca is the victim and not the bad actor here, which by comparison with Shkreli is quite the achievement!
After his performance in front of the house committee, the state were obviously going to make an example of Shkreli. Lauren Duca's contribution did the impossible and humanised him.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 12 2018, @12:58AM (1 child)
After his performance in front of the house committee, the state were obviously going to make an example of Shkreli.
Sorry for the ignorance, but can you remind us what happened here? I haven't been following the Shkreli news that well.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @01:14AM
Here's the smirking, narcissistic asshole Edited [youtube.com] and in full [youtube.com]
For good measure, although you didn't ask - "Ratchet the vortex to new heights". [youtube.com] By "vortex", I mean playing the victim whenever her crappy and obnoxious views and behaviour are challenged.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Magic Oddball on Monday March 12 2018, @04:51AM (1 child)
I'm not active on social media sites, but as far as I'm aware, it's pretty normal to make a post along the lines of "I'm at [restaurant/store] and [celebrity] just came in" with a hastily-snapped picture. Similarly, as brain-damaged as it makes her sound, the "don't/can't even" line is pretty standard. If she'd had a pattern of doing things like that to him, then that would've been creepy…but she didn't.
In contrast, Shkreli DMed her suggesting she go to the Inauguration with him to be obnoxious, called her a "cold bitch" when she turned him down, changed his profile picture to an image that depicted him sitting with her in place of her husband, posted an entire collage of images of her with the caption “For better or worse, ’til death do us part, I love you with every single beat of my heart”, and changed his bio to include “small crush on @laurenduca (hope she doesn’t find out).” He was basically engaging in creepy pseudo–stalker behavior to harass her for her one vapid Tweet.
Yet you figure that "humanised him"... So here's my question: if he'd posted a single photo of her he'd just taken with the same kind of vapid comment (to be fair, I think he'd sound a bit more intelligent), and she proceeded to ask him out to be obnoxious, called him a cold bastard when he refused, posted a photo of him sitting next to one of his girlfriends with her face posted over his GF's, then a whole collage of different images with him referencing "’til death do us part" and changed her bio to comment on having a crush on him, would you feel she was in the right?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @11:32AM
Being somewhat common does not make it "normal" or okay. The question is if there an expectation of privacy when a "celebrity" is in a public setting like a bar or restaurant. If one person followed you around all day taking pictures and posting them to twitter whenever you were in a public setting, it'd be clear stalking and harassment. Is it really any different, less creepy or over the line if multiple people are doing it? What possible motive could there be for engaging in this behaviour?
I'd think she was mocking him, that she was joking.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Sunday March 11 2018, @09:26PM (1 child)
I doubt he'll be going to a Club Fed, a camp. He'll probably go to a low security facility, one with a razor wire fence. But he'll be fine once he gets there. My prisoner corespondents tell me that conditions in Federal prisons are pretty decent, even if life is somewhat spartan. The worst part of incarceration is the jail prior to sentencing. Jail means there is little time outside of one's cell. Federal prison means lots of time outside of the cell or dorm unless there is a lockdown.
Having said all this, Martin Shkreli is a piece of work and is getting what he richly deserves.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 1) by realDonaldTrump on Monday March 12 2018, @12:22AM
This young guy raised the price to a level that’s absolutely ridiculous, and he looks like a spoiled brat to me. You want to know the truth? He looks like a spoiled brat. And he's a hedge-fund guy, who, as you know, the only one that I'm raising taxes on. They're getting away with murder. They're paying nothing, and it's ridiculous. I want to save the middle class. They are going to be paying up. But I thought it was a disgusting thing, what he did. I thought it was a disgrace. I know, it’s terrible, but in particular, there’s something about that one, the way he raised it and to that extent and then he sat back smug like he was hot stuff. That guy is nothing. He's zero. He's nothing. He ought to be ashamed of himself. The public got him to reduce it somewhat, but I think what he did was a disgrace. NO PARDON!
(Score: 5, Funny) by Hyper on Monday March 12 2018, @08:37AM
Martin Shkreli turns up at the prison commissary.
"Can I buy a pair of flipflops for the shower?"
"Sure," the commissary guy says, "that'll be $1200".
Martin stares at that the guy. "That should be $12.50".
The commissary guy shrugs. "The price suddenly went up..."