4 ms·
20 years prison seem ridiculously high in the light of the fact that most of the investors gained money instead of loosing money. He might have abused or misuse
by jonathanstrange 9y ago
20 years prison seem ridiculously high in the light of the fact that most of the investors gained money instead of loosing money. He might have abused or misused invested money but in the end they benefited from it, if I understood the news stories correctly.
- Spartan-S63 9y agoWhether or not they benefitted from his actions, he still defrauded them, essentially. The ends should never justify the means. Our legal should not take that into account when assessing penalties.
- jonwachob91 9y agoOther reports indicate that Shkreli only started returning money to MSMB investors AFTER the SEC began investigating.
- profunctor 9y agoI think it is important to show our financial laws have real teeth. A hard sentence acts as a warning to others.
- ASalazarMX 9y agoThis punishment looks unusual, though. Shkreli called too much attention towards these unethical business model, but there are more people doing it. If he's the only one convicted that harshly, it just sends a signal that you can do it, but with more discretion.
- where_do_i_live 9y agoJust because you settle and repay people with OTHER money, doesn't mean that you didn't commit fraud prior to paying them with _unrelated funds_. That's not how things work. The man committed fraud, entering into another scheme - got lucky - enough to pay off the previous people he jilted. That does not mean the crimes committed prior to the pharma scheme should be ignored.
- Lewton 9y agoThere's very few crimes in my mind that would justify 20 years in prison and fraud definitely isn't one of them