
Shkreli Got Prison Time, Holmes Didn’t. Is That Fair? - zonotope
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/business/shkreli-holmes-fraud.html
======
sudosteph
Shkreli Story time.

Not all that long ago, Shkreli was doing a stream on periscope where he asked
people to call his personal number and tell him why they hated him. Most
people were calling him and making up stories about the drug price killing
their grandma or complaining about the wu-tang album, and his response was to
be friendly, down-to-earth, and even charming in a way while re-framing the
complaints into stuff that worked towards his favor (ie: "I gave the drug for
free to people who couldn't pay, nobody died" and "Wu-Tang needed money, I
like them, and they liked the offer I made"). For the most part it worked. He
was trying to make the point that he wasn't an evil, awful guy, and that any
"hate" people held for him was more of a trend of directing general anger
towards him, rather than genuine, personal, hatred.

On a whim though, a friend of mine and I called in, and by chance, we got
through. The friend told him we hated him, but not for any of that stuff in
the news. We hated him for squandering his wealth, time, and talents on
ridiculous social media trolling (like the periscope thing). This actually
seemed to get to him a bit, the conversation lasted at least 10 minutes. He
justified it by saying stuff like "Some people relax by drinking and doing
drugs, some people play sports, I like trolling people. What's the
difference?". Ultimately, he tried to convince us that he was still trying to
do meaningful stuff and that he wasn't obsessed with his social media presence
(he even held up some book about AngularJS he said he was reading for a new
startup to prove it, which we sorta laughed at). But he seemed a little
unsettled by how the whole thing ended (us hanging up on him after he kept
trying to maneuver out of the conversation in a way that made him look good).

I got the feeling that he truly thought anyone who spent more than a few
minutes with him would like him, and see through what he saw as an unfair
media assault on him. Maybe he had this same attitude going into court too.
Only reason I can think for him to behave so brashly throughout.

~~~
ToFundorNot
I remember that one. He said he was learning to program (maybe it was angular
JS, but are you sure it wasn't a book on mongodb?).

I know that if someone were to question how I spend my time, it would strike a
chord. Anyone who prides themselves on their work ethic would take the
question personally.

What was the end goal of asking the question?

~~~
sudosteph
It was a book about the "MEAN stack" (Mongo, Express, Angular Node), so we're
probably remembering the same thing.

Not sure what you mean by end goal of the question. You mean end goal of
calling in?

Partly, I wanted a good story to tell. But I suppose I did entertain the idea
that "maybe just this once, I can influence one person who has more power than
me and everyone I know. maybe this can go somewhere". But nope, to him social
media trolling is the same as having a beer. Fast forward some months later
and he gets his bail revoked for trolling on Facebook.

It really is disappointing. I do think he's intelligent. Likewise, I do think
he should have done better things with his time and hate to see him act out
like a toddler wanting attention. He's wealthy, educated, has experience
leading companies. He doesn't need to learn some particular web stack to prove
he's a hard worker or troll social media to prove he's fun. Why does a person
with so much opportunity at their disposal care so deeply about what the
internet thinks?

Now he's going to prison and his potential is going to be squandered for a
while longer. Hopefully it will be a learning experience for him as a person
at least. He's got issues to work out.

~~~
joering2
First, “Minor” correction: his bail was not revoked for trolling on Facebook;
he asked for sample of Clinton hair to reserch her DNA and some people
rightfully felt its a threat and reported him.

OP was asking why he is wasting time, like Shkrelli supposed to work 24/7\.
Like he said - better to chat with people online than go and draink/smoke
until you puke. The mere fact OP wanted to call and talked with him indicates
Shkrelli did something more than average Joe with whom I presume OP wouldnt
want to talk, unless OP daily picks anrandom number and call to chat.

Second, I dont blame Shkrelli for playing harsh about the drug price because
he still played same game as everyone else, called capitalism. I witnessed
bigger scumbags in my life; worked for company who hired HR manager for
$250k/annul only to come back with pink report after one year and getting rid
of 10% work force and therefore saving $500k by pushing their work on current
employers that already were making 10 hours a day. Then they gave him $150k
bonus and everyone consider him being “a great and successful guy”.

Finally I dont worry about Shkrelli. He has money ergo after less than two
years he will be at home confinment for another year so three years from now
we gonna hear from him, healthy free and ready for another startup.

------
gormz
No, no it's not. Shkreli wasn't even that bad of a dude. He was evil in the
public eye because he wanted to be and honestly helped out a lot of bullshit
happening in the pharmaceutical industry (that we already knew). Shkreli went
to jail because reddit thought he was the worst dude in the world and he was
the perfect skapegoat in the situation. People think justice was served even
though it never will be.

Sidenote: Hope his WuTang album goes into the public domain after this.

~~~
9889095r3jh
Please don't distort the record. He committed a crime (defrauding investors)
which carried potential prison time as a sentence. Prosecutors sought 15
years. The judge sentenced him to just 7. Considering he displayed disdain for
the law and showed little hope for reform, putting him away for 7 years seemed
reasonable to the judge, as he would have likely committed more crimes had he
gotten off with a wrist slap.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/09/business/martin-
shkreli-s...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/09/business/martin-shkreli-
sentenced.html)

~~~
whamlastxmas
I heard but didn't confirm that he made the investors whole. No one lost any
money. Seven years for that, while people who have committed murder/rape get
less, is ridiculous.

~~~
spamizbad
That's a very strange way of looking at money. What about opportunity cost?

Lets say it's 2011 and you have $50,000 saved for a down payment on your dream
house. I steal that money from you, but return you ~$56,000 7 years later
(I've adjusted for inflation).

Technically you haven't lost any money.

But you missed the opportunity to purchase your dream house during a dip in
the housing market while interest rates were low. Now, not only is your dream
home 30% more expensive, interest rates are higher. You also missed out on 7
years worth of mortgage and real estate tax breaks. Your credit score isn't as
robust either, since you don't have 7 years worth of mortgage history on it.

You are way behind despite getting every penny back.

~~~
kolpa
Shkreli paid investors back with interest.

[http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/29/news/martin-shkreli-fraud-
tr...](http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/29/news/martin-shkreli-fraud-
trial/index.html)

> After their meeting, Sarah Hassan invested $300,000 in MSMB Capital, a fund
> Shkreli ran. He later told her that investment had increased to $435,000,
> she said. [approximately 2 years later]

> Hassan eventually settled with Shkreli and she even made money off her
> original investment. She told the court she received $400,000 in cash, plus
> 58,000 shares of Retrophin that were eventually sold for an additional
> $900,000.

------
Zigurd
No, it isn't fair. Moreover Shkreli's crime isn't within an order of magnitude
of what Holmes did in terms of financial damage. Shkreli wasn't endangering
lives with fake products.

I'm pleased the Shkreli is doing time. That sends the right message. Holmes
skating with a fine does not send the right message.

------
projectramo
For people who claim it wasn't fair but he was responsible: that is a
contradiction.

If it isn't fair, it isn't fair because his behavior -- however off-putting --
should not have lead to such severe punishment.

I don't have an opinion as to whether it was fair because I don't know the
details.

I suspect the things that he did legally were often far worse than the things
he did illegally.

------
watwut
"Typically you get more sympathy from the criminal justice system if you’re an
attractive young woman than a brash, arrogant young male"

The proper comparison would be to "brash, arrogant young women". You can even
keep attractive as in "attractive, brash, arrogant young X" if you must. As
in, large factor seem to be that Holmes was better at following layers advice
about how to act in public and during investigation. She might be sociopath or
whatever, but she managed not to be one publicly during the time the case was
processed.

Alternatively you can compare attractive polite young man to attractive polite
young women. Or leave gender out. But hell, keep "ability to follow lawyers
advice and not tease people in justice system while it is litigated" constant.

Maybe justice system should be less eager to take offense. It just so happen
that cops, prosecutors and judges are extremely easy to offend and have quite
a lot of power. But you know, not calling prosecutor idiot while he is
deciding about you is an important life skill if you plan to break the law.

~~~
gormz
Yeah maybe, but I don't think he really cared. I hope more people care about
the corruption in this sort of industry after this.

------
tim333
It's not over yet - Holmes could still do time for fraud.

Re Shkreli, as soon as he was convicted for security fraud and paroled he
offered money to assault Hillary Clinton. What would you do as a judge?
[http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-
canada-41262249](http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41262249)

~~~
patrickg_zill
Hair falls off of people's heads all the time. Especially older people's hair.

To call it assault is overblown.

------
WheelsAtLarge
Not fair for Shkreli, but he brought it upon himself. He made such a spectacle
of his situation that prosecutors and judges had to hit him hard. They would
have been highly criticised otherwise.

Also, Holmes had so many high power people associated with the company that
the media would have had a field day reporting on that and it would have been
highly embarrassing for them. I'm sure they all helped her get the best deal.

My view is that they both broke the law so they should have gotten time.

Lesson learned, if you get in trouble with the law don't poke the bear.

~~~
charlesdm
Shkreli sure did like to poke the bear, didn't he?

~~~
throwaway84742
So did Holmes: brazenly and knowingly lying to everyone qualifies as poking
the bear in my book. She’s just much better connected, so she gets to live
under another set of laws.

------
notlob
It seems premature to ask the question in the title at this juncture, doesn't
it? DoJ is still investigating Holmes.

------
mcv
I find it typical that Shkreli was convicted for ripping off rich people,
while his ripping off poor people turned out to be totally legal. Fair? Not
remotely.

~~~
rainieri
How did he rip off poor people?

~~~
mcv
He's mostly known for extreme price increases for medicine.

~~~
rainieri
A medicine for approximately 5000 people in the entire country. People with
AIDS and toxoplasmosis. IIRC the increase is distributed among the entire
population and he gave the drug for free to the small portion of people who
didn't have insurance and couldn't afford it.

If anything he ripped off insurance companies.

------
yifanlu
Let’s stop pretending that we, as a society, care about fairness here. Rich
people always get away with more shit. Let’s just enjoy one rich asshole
getting part of what he deserved instead of lamenting about how a second rich
asshole didn’t. And yes, I said to enjoy it because don’t pretend these
stories means anything more to you than the entertainment value. Either you
ignore them or you acknowledge it is tabloid drama that you enjoy (I am in the
latter group). Dude was a rich asshole who took internet trolling from a
middle school hobby to a lifestyle. The deck was stacked in his favor and he
still blew it. That’s what we care about and why we like this story.

~~~
rainieri
Dude was poor with poor parents who worked his ass off to become a
multimillionaire.

And a lot of people do care about fairness. He wouldn't have delved in this
troll personality if the witch hunt hadn't happened.

Don't put everyone in the same bag.

