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

Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 446 posts

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#341

Post by hartator »

tpush wrote: post #184

The majority of comments here being sad about Shkreli kinda reaffirms my views about HN, I have to say. Shkreli always seemed like a personified 4chan teenager "memelord" with money. Good to see that playing out your delusions of grandeur and arrogance toward the justice system is met with consequences. Maybe in prison he will mature a bit.

> delusions of grandeur and arrogance

I don't think delusions qualify as crimes. However, bending laws to judge someone on actions outside of the scope of a trial is a crime.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#342

Post by Clubber »

where_do_i_live wrote: post #247
Clubber wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-crime-shkreli/investo... (Reuters) - One of the investors former drug company executive Martin Shkreli is accused of defrauding testified on Wednesday that Shkreli lied to him repeatedly, although he eventually made millions of dollars from the investment. This was apparently the guy who alerted investigators to the fraud. He made millions.

I make no claim that they were not paid back and in excess of their initial investment (which was not in pharmaceuticals) If I lose your money, lie to you, but then I give you 10X your money because I had that in a bank account somewhere because I won the lottery doesn't mean that I didn't commit fraud in relation to your original investment. Just because your "investment" was repaid at a greater amount doesn't mean…

>Just because your "investment" was repaid at a greater amount doesn't mean you weren't defrauded. He made money because of a settlement, NOT because the investment was in pharma. From your own source article:

Show me where I said he didn't commit fraud. Tell me which facts are wrong. I cited where he made his investors money. You just threw insults. Jackass.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#343

Post by btian »

dwild wrote: post #319
harryh wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Malaria person: please wpietri, help me. wpietri: No Sick person: please shkreli, help me. shkreli: Sure, for $500 At least in the second scenario the person is being offered an option under which they get help. It sounds a lot better than the first scenario for the afflicted.

2012 - Malaria person: please dwild, help me. dwild: no 2017 - Malaria person: please dwild, help me. dwild: no 2012 - Sick person: please Daraprim, help me. Daraprim: Sure, for US$13.5 2017 - Sick person: please Daraprim, help me. shkreli: Sure, for US$750 You see the difference? With me, they stayed at the same level of help, none. In the second, he purposefully profited from the help they were getting from Darapri…

Yes I see the difference.

Shkreli is charging more. What still better than dwild though.

So maybe dwild should go to jail

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#344

Post by aetherson »

viraptor wrote: post #271
aetherson wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you make it punishable by prison time to charge more than some unknowable fair amount of money to make drugs, then nobody will make drugs . If you make it not a crime to deceive investors and misuse their money, then rich people won't invest their money, they will keep it in vaults. I consider "a world in which people who don't want to risk prison are still able to make drugs" and "a world in which capital is inve…

> If you make it punishable by prison time to charge more than some unknowable fair amount of money to make drugs, then nobody will make drugs. That's not true. First because price gouging laws already exist, so it's not entirely unknowable - especially if this rule became a law. Second, because once it's known, it's like any other existing limit. If you pay people lower than minimal legal wage, you're liable - that…

Price gouging laws are generally applied only during emergencies, and ones that aren't are not, to my knowledge, well-enforced or constitutionally tested.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#345

Post by jkaplowitz »

daxorid wrote: post #299
danso wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's basically what this comes down to. The judge didn't create the law regarding securities fraud, nor did she instigate the charges of fraud, nor did she even have a voice when it came to deciding to convict (it was a jury trial). So how does this all boil down to a judge's feelings being hurt? All crimes will be inconsistently enforced until we've built a policing apparatus that operates like the equivalent of…

> So how does this all boil down to a judge's feelings being hurt? The way I read the parent is that this conviction would almost certainly not merit seven years in a typical non-Shkreli case. But the judge handed down seven years, not because of his crime, but because of his attitude . The OP even suggested as much, suggesting if he had just "kissed the ring", the sentence would have been substantially less. I read…

In the US federal justice system, the US Sentencing Guidelines are officially advisory as of several years ago. Judges have to consult them and are expected to explain any deviation they adopt, but they can impose any sentence allowed by the statute which was violated.

I guess the statute text has embedded minimum and maximum sentencing guidelines in a sense, but the term Sentencing Guidelines in the US federal judicial context means something specific.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#346

Post by kirillseva »

jonnycomputer wrote: post #70
sol_remmy wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the sentence was WAY harsher than normal because of 1,2 and 4. It was a white collar crime. NO monetary damages. And 8 years?? Clearly they sentenced him for 8 years for political reasons

it was white collar crime, so you know, its like totally not a big deal. right? speaks to me of a culture problem here.

the thing that he was sentenced for was a white collar crime with no monetary damages. If it were a white collar crime with damage done then sure, prison time might have been appropriate. 7 years seems too harsh, and was most likely the byproduct of Martin behaving like an asshole and the general public being "upset" about the drug price hike

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#347

Post by ecommerceguy »

dwild wrote: post #319
harryh wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Malaria person: please wpietri, help me. wpietri: No Sick person: please shkreli, help me. shkreli: Sure, for $500 At least in the second scenario the person is being offered an option under which they get help. It sounds a lot better than the first scenario for the afflicted.

2012 - Malaria person: please dwild, help me. dwild: no 2017 - Malaria person: please dwild, help me. dwild: no 2012 - Sick person: please Daraprim, help me. Daraprim: Sure, for US$13.5 2017 - Sick person: please Daraprim, help me. shkreli: Sure, for US$750 You see the difference? With me, they stayed at the same level of help, none. In the second, he purposefully profited from the help they were getting from Darapri…

Gosh I wonder if a replacement was made for Daraprim..

>Imprimis Pharmaceuticals, a specialty pharmaceutical company that creates compounded drugs, released a $1 a pill alternative to , a toxoplasmosis treatment whose price skyrocketed by over 5,000% in recent months.

>While the new pill is a boon for patients in need of treatment for the food-borne illness, especially those with weak immune systems like HIV/AIDS and cancer patients, the alternative drug is not an exact copy of Daraprim.

>Imprimis’ pill is a combination of pyrimethamine—the sole ingredient in Daraprim—and leucovorin, a medicine that helps reverse the negative effects on bone marrow caused by the way pyrimethamine works in the body. The two medicines work synergistically and are recommended to be taken in tandem by the Centers for Disease Control. Leucovorin is often prescribed alongside Daraprim.

Not only was the replacement cheaper, it was daraprim coupled with another drug to fight side effects of daraprim.

The judge in this case has a history of using her bench as a bully pulpit. She claims that outside factors had 0 influence on her decision. I find that pretty hard to believe especially with her history.

As for the cost increase I believe they were funding a non side effect version of the drug, which would probably be nice for alot of people. Bone marrow is something thats hard to live without.

This will be overturned. So what if he's a trolling douchebag.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#348

Post by danso »

daxorid wrote: post #299
danso wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's basically what this comes down to. The judge didn't create the law regarding securities fraud, nor did she instigate the charges of fraud, nor did she even have a voice when it came to deciding to convict (it was a jury trial). So how does this all boil down to a judge's feelings being hurt? All crimes will be inconsistently enforced until we've built a policing apparatus that operates like the equivalent of…

> So how does this all boil down to a judge's feelings being hurt? The way I read the parent is that this conviction would almost certainly not merit seven years in a typical non-Shkreli case. But the judge handed down seven years, not because of his crime, but because of his attitude . The OP even suggested as much, suggesting if he had just "kissed the ring", the sentence would have been substantially less. I read…

Why don’t we approach his sentence from the opposite direction: the prosecution proposed a 15-year sentence, which is less than a reported max of ~25 years under federal guidelines. 7 years is a fraction of what Shkreli could face, so why don’t we accuse her of being emotionally swayed to be lenient?

I agree that feelings are inextricably involved when human judges and juries make decisions. And all initiatives to correct for this — such as the 3-strikes law and mandatory sentencing guidelines — are likewise imperfect. I’m personally surprised at the severity of Shkreli’s sentence, but that’s because I don’t know this area of law or its precedent. And in the arguments I’ve seen asserting the sentence is too severe, I haven’t seen citations and evidence that contradict the precedent she used in her judgment.

Yes, much of Shkreli’s situation has no precedent. But we should consider that judges can act cautiously in extremely publicized trials, especially ones involving defendants who are rich enough to mount an appeal. You think the judge faces no risk if she decides to draw up a sentence without defensible legal basis?

I agree that we should worry if justice is meted out by judges who aren’t aware or empathetic toward defendants who are socially incompetent or otherwise social/psychological outliers. But just because popular media/opinion seems to hate Shkreli doesn’t necessarily mean we can ascribe such bias to the judge without empirical evidence.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#349

Post by DoreenMichele »

kirillseva wrote: post #346
jonnycomputer wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it was white collar crime, so you know, its like totally not a big deal. right? speaks to me of a culture problem here.

the thing that he was sentenced for was a white collar crime with no monetary damages. If it were a white collar crime with damage done then sure, prison time might have been appropriate. 7 years seems too harsh, and was most likely the byproduct of Martin behaving like an asshole and the general public being "upset" about the drug price hike

Him being a chronic and flaming asshole throughout the whole thing makes it clear that if he isn't somehow taught a lesson, he will keep doing this stuff.

Like a lot of sociopaths, he has figured out that most people are nicer than him and he can get away with a lot of outrageous behavior because most people are simply better behaved than him, so he is unlikely to be crapped on to the degree that he is all too happy to crap on others.

Hopefully the long sentence will clue him that betting that way stops working if you push it far enough. No, you don't get to disregard social norms in how you treat others, then bank on them protecting you. Life is a two way street. Social contracts involve two parts. You don't get to endlessly abuse social norms because your wiring is outside the norm and being mean is perfectly comfortable to you.

Re: Martin Shkreli has been sentenced to seven years in prison

#350

Post by sctb »

Clubber wrote: post #342
where_do_i_live wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I make no claim that they were not paid back and in excess of their initial investment (which was not in pharmaceuticals) If I lose your money, lie to you, but then I give you 10X your money because I had that in a bank account somewhere because I won the lottery doesn't mean that I didn't commit fraud in relation to your original investment. Just because your "investment" was repaid at a greater amount doesn't mean…

>Just because your "investment" was repaid at a greater amount doesn't mean you weren't defrauded. He made money because of a settlement, NOT because the investment was in pharma. From your own source article: Show me where I said he didn't commit fraud. Tell me which facts are wrong. I cited where he made his investors money. You just threw insults. Jackass.

Please stop.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN