Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

bloomberglaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 182 posts

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#11

Post by elevensies »

There was a lawsuit a little while back [August], Retrophin, Inc. v. Shkreli, and reading the complaint it seems to be basically a litany of fraud, so wouldn't be surprised if these charges had a bunch of overlap with the earlier lawsuit -- although I haven't yet read the indictment.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-17/retrophin-...

PDF of complaint: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=214847399&... from: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2mxis2kze/new-york-southern...

Edit:

The Retrophin complaint also contains more detail about what happend with Merril Lynch:

24. Shkreli also had to contend with Merrill Lynch, which had sued him and MSMB Capital in connection with the Orex Trade (the “Merrill Lynch Arbitration”). Shkreli and MSMB Capital had entered into a settlement agreement with Merrill Lynch that required Shkreli and MSMB Capital to execute confessions of judgment in favor of Merrill Lynch. The confessions of judgment would not be filed if Shkreli and MSMB Capital timely paid the agreedupon settlement amount. Shkreli funded the Merrill Lynch settlement – and avoided the filing of the confessions of judgment – by causing a $900,000 investment in Retrophin equity securities made by MSMB Healthcare to be recharacterized as a “loan,” causing the “loan” to be repaid with interest, and using the “loan” proceeds together with other money taken from Retrophin to pay Merrill Lynch. See generally ¶¶47-58, infra.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#13

Post by the_hangman »

> On or about December 2, 2010, Investor 1 [...] asked SHKRELI in an email about, inter alia, the fund's assets under management and the names of its independent auditor and fund administrator. SHKRELI told Investor 1 that MSMB Capital had $35 million in assets under management and that the fund's independent auditor and administrator were Rothstein, Kass & Company, P.C. and NAV Consulting Inc., respectively. At the time of this representation, MSMB Capital did not have an independent auditor or administrator, and SHKRELI had lost through trading the approximately $700,000 that had been invested by the four Capital Limited Partners. In fact, as of November 30, 2010, the value of assets in MSMB Capital's bank and brokerage accounts totaled approximately $700.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#14

Post by hapless »

fukusa wrote: post #9
chriscappuccio wrote: post #7

The indictment makes it obvious that this started long before Daraprim was in the news. I'd say this isn't politically motivated, at least not for that reason alone.

It could have been laying around. "We'll use this when we need to"

The indictment makes it clear he's been under SEC investigation for six years. Meanwhile, his former firm is suing him for stealing shareholder's money.

Both matters pre-date Skreli's national notoriety, because it was his new, post-Retrophin firm that made him "famous" for price gouging.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#15

Post by davesque »

Interesting that the crime which was "serious" enough to motivate law enforcement was theft of capital, NOT drug price gouging. It had nothing to do with Daraprim. Of course, Mr. Shkreli's recent popularity in the headlines may have greased the wheels of this investigation a bit.

Update: As has been pointed out, this comes as no surprise since this kind of price gouging is perfectly legal.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#17

Post by azernik »

davesque wrote: post #15

Interesting that the crime which was "serious" enough to motivate law enforcement was theft of capital, NOT drug price gouging. It had nothing to do with Daraprim. Of course, Mr. Shkreli's recent popularity in the headlines may have greased the wheels of this investigation a bit. Update : As has been pointed out, this comes as no surprise since this kind of price gouging is perfectly legal.

The galling thing about the whole drug price gouging story is that it was perfectly legal. That said, I'm not sure we can speak with confidence about law enforcement's motivations.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#18

Post by amateur_soclgst »

the_hangman wrote: post #13

> On or about December 2, 2010, Investor 1 [...] asked SHKRELI in an email about, inter alia, the fund's assets under management and the names of its independent auditor and fund administrator. SHKRELI told Investor 1 that MSMB Capital had $35 million in assets under management and that the fund's independent auditor and administrator were Rothstein, Kass & Company, P.C. and NAV Consulting Inc., respectively. At the…

I found it funnier how they tried to short sell $1M of stock and somehow got $7M in the hole. Must have been some leverage on that deal :v

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#19

Post by mahouse »

The ones here being happy at this guy being indicted are the ones that defend economic libertarianism later for the sole reason that it allows them to pay less taxes, regardless of what's in the public interest. Disgustingly selfish.

Re: Martin Shkreli indictment [pdf]

#20

Post by astrodust »

davesque wrote: post #15

Interesting that the crime which was "serious" enough to motivate law enforcement was theft of capital, NOT drug price gouging. It had nothing to do with Daraprim. Of course, Mr. Shkreli's recent popularity in the headlines may have greased the wheels of this investigation a bit. Update : As has been pointed out, this comes as no surprise since this kind of price gouging is perfectly legal.

As it stands, there's no law against price gouging. As morally questionable as his pricing is, there's nothing illegal about it. "Being a dick" isn't a criminal offense. Yet.
Post reply on HN