Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud • Hacker News Board

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#531

Post by babaganoosh223 » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 2:55 AM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #524

turc1656 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. I think it will be a major factor at sentencing. First the fact that he did give them their money (with a significant return on it) back to the people well before the government got involved (meaning it wasn't a PR show) to me means there was never any intent for them to actually lose money. I think the judge will see it the same way. Because if that weren't true, he would never have repatriated the money…

Most ponzi schemes and unauthorised trading start with someone trying to make up for a loss they made and hoping they will fix things and everyone will be made up. That doesn't make it less serious. It may look surprising given the hatred of bankers here, but it's a profession based on honesty. A guy got banned from the city in London for regularly frauding on his train tickets.

He didn't get convicted of the ponzi scheme charge though. So the way he paid back investors is considered legit.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#532

Post by gaadd33 » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 2:56 AM UTC

ImSkeptical wrote: post #394

singtings wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why did you think his defense was a good one against fraud? He lied to people who gave him their money. That is what fraud is. The outcome does not matter.

Fraud has other components beyond just lying. For example, I could tell you that I'm Santa Claus, and, due to the rising complexity of children's toys, I need more money to hire additional elves this year, would you please donate? That wouldn't be fraud though, because, among other things, you aren't damaged by it. You might be damaged by it if you sent me your money, and I actually used it to buy myself sugar cookie…

Do the early investors who made money from Madoff's funds not have a fraud case against him since they made money even though it was paid out from later investors and not from the actual investments claimed?

It seems like both cases are fraud, it's just that one has a better outcome for the victim than suing and hoping it wasn't all spent on Wu-Tang albums.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#533

Post by accountyaccount » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 2:57 AM UTC

Wait wait wait, he committed fraud... but everyone he defrauded actually ended up getting a 3X return on their investment because he just took money from another one of his ventures?

I mean, illegal sure, but seems like he still held up his end of the bargain.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#534

Post by gaadd33 » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 2:59 AM UTC

artursapek wrote: post #480

downandout wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could see that he was expecting something like that based upon his press conference outside the courthouse. I think he's in for a very rude introduction to the concept of "intended loss" and the federal sentencing system in general.

Not claiming any knowledge on the subject, just wanted to back up suggestions of his expectations with evidence. We'll see what happens. Personally I'm rooting for him, I think he's misunderstood.

I'm curious, what part of his message is misunderstood to you?

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#535

Post by vonkow » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 3:00 AM UTC

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #530

vonkow wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the #1 go to defence for terrible people when they get called out for their actions, "it's just a joke, I was just kidding, don't be so sensitive."

You are way too sensitive though. The virtue signaling is through the roof. All you're doing here is "trying to make sure a terrible person gets their comeuppance." Like really? You've never pulled a prank in your life? I notice you and a lot of people like you have around 100-500 karma. I wonder if it's just newbies trying to find some way of differentiating themselves. Virtue signaling is in fashion, so it makes se…

I didn't say anything about anything beyond the fact that that's the classic defence of trolling and it's a piss poor one. Cool that you looked at my karma tho, like it means something. I've been around the block more than a few times and am generally too busy to comment on hacker news.

Also, way to use the term virtue signalling to offhandedly dismiss anyone that thinks people should treat other people with some amount of respect.

Anyway, I hope you have a good day and that you treat others the way you would like to be treated.

Edit: and yeah, I pulled a few pranks when I was like 15. They were stupid and I grew out of it once I learned that my actions affected others.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#536

Post by fragsworth » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 3:04 AM UTC

throwawayjava wrote: post #493

Clubber wrote: post #5

I use to hate this guy, then I saw the Vice interview on him. It was nice to see his side of the story. I don't know much about this case in particular. It was kinda sleazy to see the congress question him about his price increases when they knew damn well it was perfectly legal and they haven't done anything to stop it. Shkreli seems to be trying to expose this hypocrisy, but the news loves their stories. Vice inter…

> It was kinda sleazy to see the congress question him about his price increases when they knew damn well it was perfectly legal and they haven't done anything to stop it Lots of things are legal uses of taxpayer money. Lots of things aren't illegal but are worthy of public condemnation. The intersection of those things are EXACTLY the sorts of things I want my congress people going after. Do you disagree, or do you…

The point is that the system should be fixed, not just "condemn" someone for abusing it. If it's legal to do something unconscionable then that legality should change.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#537

Post by sillysaurus3 » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 3:20 AM UTC

vonkow wrote: post #535

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are way too sensitive though. The virtue signaling is through the roof. All you're doing here is "trying to make sure a terrible person gets their comeuppance." Like really? You've never pulled a prank in your life? I notice you and a lot of people like you have around 100-500 karma. I wonder if it's just newbies trying to find some way of differentiating themselves. Virtue signaling is in fashion, so it makes se…

I didn't say anything about anything beyond the fact that that's the classic defence of trolling and it's a piss poor one. Cool that you looked at my karma tho, like it means something. I've been around the block more than a few times and am generally too busy to comment on hacker news. Also, way to use the term virtue signalling to offhandedly dismiss anyone that thinks people should treat other people with some amo…

I've been around the block more than a few times and am generally too busy to comment on hacker news.

This is just another way of saying that you come around to snipe at someone and then leave. What if Martin wanted to come participate on HN? How would he feel?

Calling someone a "terrible person" for threatening to destroy an album (and then not doing it) ruins your ability to call out truly terrible people for truly terrible things.

More than that, it's rather unfortunate to jump on the train of kicking someone while they're down. What Martin did was illegal, and he'll stand for his crimes. Using this as an opportunity to grandstand just to elevate yourself isn't very classy.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#538

Post by emodendroket » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 3:20 AM UTC

mcappleton wrote: post #452

charlesdm wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, aren't you underestimating your own intelligence? Plenty of things can be simplified for non professionals, but the nuance of certain topics is then often lost. A single word in a written law can matter a lot. No disrespect to anyone, but can an average career teacher understand the nuances of securities law? Can (s)he understand the actual difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion? Some can, absolut…

Yeah, but judges are no better at interpreting the law many times. If you don't believe me, go read some of the decisions by americas Supreme Court. For example they said a man was black therefore no a man therefor he had no right to sue in court, which basically means no rights at all. How they missed the part about due process I don't know.

Well, that's simple. They ruled he wasn't a citizen and therefore none of that applied to him. Monstrous but internally consistent.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#539

Post by bmelton » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 3:36 AM UTC

lomnakkus wrote: post #473

cloakandswagger wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Perhaps that makes me a bad person. Not bad, merely ignorant. You're celebrating the incarceration of someone you presumably know very little about, all while searching for "true" victims ("perhaps the public?") to fuel your indignation.

No, I think you actually mean bad . (That's not to say I don't understand your sentinment towards me , but really... I haven't hiked prices on life-saving medicines by upwards of 1000%, etc., so at least I win on moral relatisivm points?) This man has harmed quite a few people... or their insurance companies... which of course means harming of their customers, i.e. "us" (who can even afford insurance). I know enough…

> Look, if he hadn't been convicted of securities fraud, I would still be defending his rights as a... defendant, but now that he has been convicted, I don't feel sorry for him.

Unfair sentencing is just as much judicial malfeasance as is prosecutorial misconduct, unfair court trials or allegations. As citizens of America (which I assume, but do not know you to be) we should all champion fairness at ever level of the judicial process at all times, lest we ever find ourselves or our friends in the crosshairs of a court that we've allowed to give punitive sentencing to.

There are undoubtedly very good debates to be had on what might be considered a fair sentence for a crime of this nature, but if you're damning him for crimes completely disconnected from this case, then by definition you are championing an unfair sentence. That's the sort of thing that has allowed our judicial system to get away with so much unfair treatment in the past, and for all our sakes, we should root against it at every level.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#540

Post by vonkow » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 3:41 AM UTC

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #537

vonkow wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say anything about anything beyond the fact that that's the classic defence of trolling and it's a piss poor one. Cool that you looked at my karma tho, like it means something. I've been around the block more than a few times and am generally too busy to comment on hacker news. Also, way to use the term virtue signalling to offhandedly dismiss anyone that thinks people should treat other people with some amo…

I've been around the block more than a few times and am generally too busy to comment on hacker news. This is just another way of saying that you come around to snipe at someone and then leave. What if Martin wanted to come participate on HN? How would he feel? Calling someone a "terrible person" for threatening to destroy an album (and then not doing it) ruins your ability to call out truly terrible people for truly…

No, that's my way of saying, who cares how many points I have on an internet forum and how are said points relevant to what I am saying? I glance at what's on HN in the morning and occasionally comment when something is super relevant or when I'm bored and sipping on a drink after work.

I was sniping at you and your, oh so typical, defence of trolling, but since you want to talk about Martin (are you on a first name basis or something?), he's a terrible person for waaaaay more reasons than threatening to burn an album. You wanna talk about kicking people when they're down? Let's start with jacking up the price on a drug that a good number of people with HIV need to survive, because that's kicking someone when they're down, unlike calling out a troll for being a troll. Sure, he was legally in his right to do so, but just because something is legal doesn't make it morally the right thing to do.

Thanks for reminding me why I rarely comment on things online, I have better things to do than argue with someone who sees more humanity in a troll than they do in the people he has hurt.