"Pharma Bro" Martin Shkreli, being found guilty of three securities fraud for mismanaging the investment funds and two years ago he was also involved with the drug companies, increasing the price of an AIDS drug.
"What this trial proved is that I didn't make money through illicit means", Shkreli said during the post-trial livestream. "We think verdict as it now stands, will permit this court to impose very lenient sentence", Brafman said.
Shkreli, as the CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals, is accused of unapologetically raising the price of anAIDS drug from $13.50 per pill to $750.
The jury's decision, following five days of deliberations, did not give either side the clear victory they wanted, but was certainly humbling for Shkreli who had boasted that prosecutors would have to apologize to him when the case was over.
The defendant also came into the trial with a reputation for trolling his critics on social media to a degree that got him kicked off Twitter and for live-streaming himself giving math lessons or doing nothing more than petting his cat, named Trashy.
Brafman said that while Shkreli's statements to investors were not always true, he made them in good faith. But that's not why he was found guilty of fraud today (Aug. 4). Mr. Shkreli's attorney, Benjamin Brafman, citing his client's acquittal on the Retrophin charge, said Mr. Shkreli might avoid prison time or at least receive a "much, much lower" sentence than that contemplated by the government.
After the conviction, Shkreli said that he was he was glad to be exonerated on numerous charges and "we're delighted in many ways".
The fraud charges are unrelated to the drug price hike, and have to do with a Ponzi scheme he ran between 2009 and 2014 in which he bilked investors out of a total of $11 million.
"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", Shkreli said following the verdicts. Some potential jurors even described Martin Shkreli as a "d**k", in addition to other derogatory words and language.
Veteran New York City defense attorney Gerald Lefcourt. said: 'It's twofold: You don't want to antagonize the judge and you don't want to get the attention of the jury in a way that hurts your case'.