[U] Well. It Seems The Incarcerated Felon Never Filed Any Sworn Financial Affidavit — In Brooklyn — Even Under Seal…

….and so, Messrs. Brafman and the able lawyer-folks at Fox Rothchild may never get any part of the $5 million, purportedly still in an E*Trade brokerage account, ostensibly under Mr. Shkreli’s name. Even if Mr. Brafman has filed his attorneys’ lien — at the appropriate federal office, he will lose unless he can show his firm, via Shkreli’s pending insolvency, will not get paid at all. And the only competent evidence the judge will now accept, of that fact — given Mr. Shkreli’s endless string of prevarications on the subject of his finances — will be a sworn affidavit from the man himself. And it will have to be comprehensive.

In sum… Not a  good look, Ben. You might have mentioned that you at least read and understood the relevant federal statute. Then you might have argued for a departure from its strictures. Not now. You are stuck.

This will all be powerful motivation (i.e., the screws applied by his two law firms) for Marty to swear out a completely truthful written, detailed affidavit of his REAL net worth. WIthout making that sworn filing, it is highly likely that the AUSAs (with the backing of the IRS and NY State taxing authorities) will simply move to forfeit — and the able Judge Matsumoto is broadly hinting (without such an affidavit) she will so order it.  Kiss that E*Trade goodbye, boys.

A hat tip to Billy, by way of Christie Smythe — for alerting me to the entry of the order today. I’ve been pillar to post on several matters over at the Chinese Consulate in Chicago. Here is the order, in full:

ORDER denying [375] Motion to Release Bond Obligation as to Martin Shkreli.

Pursuant to 28 United States Code Section 2044, “[t]he court shall not release any money deposited for bond purposes after…a verdict of the defendant’s guilt has been entered and before sentencing except upon a showing that an assessment, fine, restitution or penalty cannot be imposed for the offense the defendant committed or that the defendant would suffer an undue hardship.” The court has not yet determined whether a fine, restitution, or penalty will be imposed on Mr. Shkreli, but Mr. Shkreli has not established that a fine, restitution, or penalty cannot be imposed for the offenses of which he was convicted. With regard to Mr. Shkreli’s claim that he will suffer an “undue hardship,” the court notes that he has not completed a sworn financial affidavit. Based on Mr. Shkreli’s limited submissions, the court concludes that Mr. Shkreli will not suffer an “undue hardship” by the retention of his bond. 

The parties are respectfully directed to confer, and to file a letter advising the court of how they wish to proceed with regards to a forfeiture hearing, by October 24, 2017.

Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 10/19/2017….

Lovely. What to say when your defense lawyer doesn’t even address the relevant federal law on the matter? Clearly, the AUSAs did (as we mentioned yesterday) — which is why I presumed the able Judge Matsumoto had already ruled, orally, from the bench — at some point. The matter is essentially free from any colorable doubt.

UPDATE 10.19.2017 @ 5 PM EDT: Another order just entered.

Jury Selection as to Evan Greebel continued on 10/19/2017. Case Called. All parties present. Mr. Greebel present. The Court conducted the Voir Dire and the Jury Panel selected. Jury trial to begin on 10/20/2017 at 9:00a.m. in Courtroom 6C South….

Now… onward to a Friday in Brooklyn of opening statements, at 9 AM jury selection, for Mr. Greebel’s felony trial… hopefully we will see opening statements by Monday, then.

Namaste

 

Advertisements

His Reading/Book List… Is Sorta’ Sad, Actually — Ayn Rand… Much?

An apparently millennial acolyte (whose name and Twitter account I’ll not mention — as it seems she is seeking a measure of derivative Twitter fame) is curating a reading/book wish list on Amazon/Google docs, for the benefit of our favorite incarcerated felon.

Predictably, his requests keep bouncing — mostly because under the federal prisons rules (“reading is a skill, people!”) he may only receive five books per week — and no one is taking responsibility for staging the deliveries. “Reading is… fundamental… an’ sh!t.”

Hilarious.

You may catch a link to the account containing his full list — off of/at the twitter account of Christie Smythe, his presumably authorized biographer.

But to be clear, she is not handling the list. I didn’t want to look — but I did. It is all pretty sophomoric, in truth.

[Still enduring jury selection, on Mr. Greebel’s trial it seems.]

नमस्ते

[U] And — In Longhand — We Learn Shkreli Isn’t Sure What Field He’s “Working” In…

I am bemused to learn — almost on cue — that Marty is trolling the media… and longhand, no less.

Do note that he “changed” (crossed out) the field in which his “breakthrough” is pending.

I’ll leave it at that. [My bet is that this was written about three weeks ago, by Mr. Shkreli — as it takes that long to clear the baffles at the MDC. And to be clear, I removed the convict’s praise of Donald Trump from my derivative copy.]

UPDATED: 10.17.2017 @ 10 AM EDT — let me also remark that both sets of candidate inhibitors are thought to work on cardio-vascular muscle tissue. And both are well-known, in the cardiac event field of use — just do a one minute check on PubMed/PubChem. These are not “breakthroughs” by the felon, in any sense. So he’s doing heart drug research — entirely by reading books, as I gather they don’t keep a wide stock of knock-out mice colonies at the ready in the Brooklyn MDC commissary (his only lawful source of purchasable “proteins”). Charming.

Namaste — to all of good will.

For R. West: Some Shkreli-Junk-A-Topia, On Opening Of Mr. Greebel’s Jury Selection…

As I’ve long indicated, I will mostly ignore the granular details of Mr. Greebel’s trial — as jury selection gets underway here, in Brooklyn.

What I will do, as a favor to R. West, here — is post two letters from Mr. Greebel’s team — filed on Sunday, in Brooklyn, which point up more detail about Mr. Shkreli’s schemes (in an effort to exonerate Mr. Greebel).

They are here, and here, respectively (as a four- and six- page pair of PDFs).

It strikes me as incorrect to argue that the government is advancing a new theory. It strikes me that the government is allowed to prove the conspiracy charge on parking was driven by more than one motive.

So called specific motive is not an element of the crime charged here, in Count Seven — and multiple motives may exist for any number of allegedly criminal acts. That the government now argues that part of Messrs. Shkreli’s and Greebel’s motive was to place shares in friendly (i.e., Shkreli-controlled) hands, in secret, and against the SEC rules — is not inconsistent with also attempting to compensate former hedge fund investors for their losses — allegedly illicitly.

I will also note (as a silly side car) that in the Twitterverse, Mr. Shkreli is reported to request a halt on delivery of philosophy, religion and modern fiction books. In addition, one of his acolytes expects that the inmates get the WSJ delivered to their cells in the MDC, thus:

“…i’m interested to see his thoughts on the list i sent him. expecting a reply back on that this week. i’m sure he gets WSJ, no?….”

Ummm… no.

I doubt that he gets more than one hour per week, in whatever the library looks like, in the MDC. And if the MDC gets the WSJ, the paper is at least two weeks stale when it arrives. And countless other inmates will have likely clipped and pocketed chunks of it, prior to his look at it.

Most likely, he never gets any real library time at all. He may fill out a form to have books routed to him, but I’d bet that the hard copy WSJ — if the prison pays for it — may never reach him.

And he has no internet at all. He gets paper printouts of incoming email, after the same is screened by the guards — usually about a week after it is sent to him, in all likelihood.

Now you know. Onward, on a clear crisp October Monday in the city of big shoulders.

 

 

One Small Tangent, From A Greebel Overnight Filing — As It Relates To Martin’s Convictions…

As I mentioned in comments, a moment ago — the first three pages of this latter, filed overnight are fascinating.

What fascinates me about the letter is that the proffered expert’s opinion — as to what creates “restrictions” on controlling stake shares is accurate — insofar as it goes — but is incomplete.

This actually matters — as to the motion for acquittal filed by Mr. Brafman, as well. [I will have much more on the last few pages, as to Professor Gillers’ testimony, in a future post.]

The expert says that giving employees shares doesn’t (by itself) make them restricted.

That is true — but incomplete. We have been told that the shares CAME FROM Fearnow (thus were initially restricted, in his hands and were so, in his transferees) — and due to Mr. Shkreli’s directions to Mr. Greebel: i.e., “split them up in this way…” Mr. Shkreli ALSO exercised control over them (and he was plainly an affiliate and control person at the relevant time)…

So… there is really no question that the so-called Fearnow shares — even after they reach ordinary employees’ hands… AND even after, fraudulently, those employees say they are NOT EMPLOYEES (parroting an email form Mr. Greebel asked them to return to him)… All those shares would STILL be considered restricted under Rule 144, as Mr. Shkreli fully intended, and did, in fact, exercise control over them — with overt oral and written threats (some of those of violence), among other things.

In sum, the AUSAs will have a field day with the Greebel experts on this score. And Mr. Shkreli’s chances of winning an appeal will go/have gone… poof.

Namaste