4 ms·
They were investigating him but he was largely unknown outside of some financial and biotech circles. After Daraprim and the subsequent public outrage, not to m
by peckrob 11y ago
They were investigating him but he was largely unknown outside of some financial and biotech circles. After Daraprim and the subsequent public outrage, not to mention his grating "bro" public persona, he became one of the most hated men in America. They were going to nail him for something as a result of that investigation.
Remember, they got Al Capone in the 1930s for tax evasion - not all the other things he was certainly guilty of. Several other gangsters were convicted of things like mail fraud.
If you're guilty, or even just under investigation, don't paint a target on your back. A smart person would know to lay low. Schkreli ... didn't.
- aaronbrethorst 11y agoCharging someone for what you can prove != 'political motivation.'
- peckrob 11y agoCorrect, but who's to say where the investigation would have stopped if they didn't uncover anything at first? If he wasn't so publicly reviled, it may have been dropped if wrongdoing wasn't immediately uncovered. But because he was so out there in public and so publicly reviled, he may have insured that investigators kept looking at him until they did find something they could make stick. I would note that I have no knowledge of the investigation beyond what's being reported (and only a cursory knowledge of that). I could be totally wrong. Maybe these charges were immediately obvious to investigators and it's just taken them almost a year to get their ducks in a row. I'm just theorizing here based on some historical knowledge of famous criminals and how they were eventually brought down (see my comments above on gangsters in the 20s and 30s).