A US jury on Friday convicted Martin Shkreli, the brash former drug company and hedge fund executive, of defrauding investors in hedge funds he ran years before he gained fame for jacking up the price of a drug.
Jurors in US District Court in Brooklyn found Shkreli guilty of two counts of securities fraud and one count of conspiracy. However, they acquitted him of five conspiracy counts, including conspiracy to steal from his old drug company, Retrophin Inc.
Securities fraud carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, although defendants in such cases rarely receive the maximum sentence.
Federal prosecutors had accused the 34-year-old New Yorker of lying to investors in the funds and looting Retrophin to pay them back.
Immediately after the verdict, Shkreli appeared somewhat shaken, but when he emerged from the courthouse later to talk to reporters, he seemed happy and confident.
He portrayed the verdict, which came on the fifth day of deliberations after a month-long trial, as a victory.
“This was a witch hunt of epic proportions and maybe they found one or two broomsticks, but at the end of the day, we’ve been acquitted of the most important charges,” he told reporters.
Acting US Attorney Bridget Rohde, whose office prosecuted the case, praised the jury’s decision.
“Justice was served,” she said after the verdict.
Before going on trial, Shkreli had been best known for raising the price of anti-infection drug Daraprim by 5,000 percent in 2015 as chief executive of Turing Pharmaceuticals AG.
That increase sparked outrage from US lawmakers and patients — and earned Shkreli the nickname “Pharma Bro.”
Shkreli emphasized the jury’s finding that he did not conspire to steal from Retrophin.
“Count seven was the government’s attempt to theorize that I robbed Peter to pay Paul and the jury has spoken conclusively that Retrophin was not defrauded in this case,” Shkreli told reporters.
Shkreli’s attorney Benjamin Brafman, citing his client’s acquittal on the Retrophin charge, said Shkreli might avoid prison time or at least receive a “much, much lower” sentence than that contemplated by the US government.
Prosecutors said that, starting in about 2009, Shkreli lied to investors in his hedge funds, MSMB Capital and MSMB Healthcare, concealing trading losses behind fake account statements.
Prosecutors said Shkreli eventually paid investors back with stock or cash from Retrophin by having them sign settlement or consulting agreements with the company. Those agreements were the basis for prosecutors’ claim that Shkreli conspired to steal from Retrophin.
During his closing arguments, Brafman urged jurors to see his client not as a fraudster, but as an eccentric genius determined to find cures for rare diseases.
Brafman said that Shkreli’s statements to investors were made in good faith. He also emphasized that none of Shkreli’s investors lost money, a rarity in a securities fraud case.
John Zach, a former federal prosecutor who is now a defense lawyer at the law firm of Boies Schiller Flexner, said the fact that investors did not lose money could help Shkreli get a lighter sentence.
Christopher LaVigne, a former federal prosecutor who is now a defense lawyer at the law firm of Shearman & Sterling, said it was notable that prosecutors secured a conviction without investor losses and said it could encourage more such cases in the future.
Zhang Yazhou was sitting in the passenger seat of her Tesla Model 3 when she said she heard her father’s panicked voice: The brakes do not work. Approaching a red light, her father swerved around two cars before plowing into a sport utility vehicle and a sedan, and crashing into a large concrete barrier. Stunned, Zhang gazed at the deflating airbag in front of her. She could never have imagined what was to come: Tesla Inc sued her for defamation for complaining publicly about the vehicles brakes — and won. A Chinese court ordered Zhang to pay more than US$23,000 in
‘LEGACY CHIPS’: Chinese companies have dramatically increased mature chip production capacity, but the West’s drive for secure supply chains offers a lifeline for Taiwan When Powerchip Technology Corp (力晶科技) entered a deal with the eastern Chinese city of Hefei in 2015 to set up a new chip foundry, it hoped the move would help provide better access to the promising Chinese market. However, nine years later, that Chinese foundry, Nexchip Semiconductor Corp (合晶集成), has become one of its biggest rivals in the legacy chip space, leveraging steep discounts after Beijing’s localization call forced Powerchip to give up the once-lucrative business making integrated circuits for Chinese flat panels. Nexchip is among Chinese foundries quickly winning market share in the crucial US$56.3 billion industry of so-called legacy
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電) yesterday held its first board of directors meeting in the US, at which it did not unveil any new US investments despite mounting tariff threats from US President Donald Trump. Trump has threatened to impose 100 percent tariffs on Taiwan-made chips, prompting market speculation that TSMC might consider boosting its chip capacity in the US or ramping up production of advanced chips such as those using a 2-nanometer technology process at its Arizona fabs ahead of schedule. Speculation also swirled that the chipmaker might consider building its own advanced packaging capacity in the US as part
‘NO DISRUPTION’: A US trade association said that it was ready to work with the US administration to streamline the program’s requirements and achieve shared goals The White House is seeking to renegotiate US CHIPS and Science Act awards and has signaled delays to some upcoming semiconductor disbursements, two sources familiar with the matter told reporters. The people, along with a third source, said that the new US administration is reviewing the projects awarded under the 2022 law, meant to boost US domestic semiconductor output with US$39 billion in subsidies. Washington plans to renegotiate some of the deals after assessing and changing current requirements, the sources said. The extent of the possible changes and how they would affect agreements already finalized was not immediately clear. It was not known
RSS