Prosecutors Argue 'Pharma Bro' Martin Shkreli Should Not Be Freed to Research COVID-19 Cure
Benjamin Brafman argued that Shkreli is a skilled medical researcher already devoted to studying a drug that could "bring relief and treatment to people suffering from COVID-19."
April 29, 2020 at 01:55 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
If former pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli seeks to cure COVID-19, he can do so from prison, prosecutors argued Tuesday in their response to Shkreli's motion for release in the Eastern District of New York.
Shkreli, who was sentenced to seven years in prison for securities fraud in March 2018, filed for release from his low-security facility in Allenwood, Pennsylvania, on April 22. His lawyer Benjamin Brafman argued that Shkreli is a skilled medical researcher already devoted to studying a drug that could "bring relief and treatment to people suffering from COVID-19."
"I have always maintained that if he was left alone for several months Martin could cure cancer," Brafman said when asked Wednesday about the government's response. "Why not give him a chance to help find a cure for COVID-19 … what is the downside?"
Assistant U.S. Attorney Alixandra Smith argued that, if Shkreli has already been researching a cure and communicating with people in the pharmaceutical field while in prison, he can continue to do so.
"Shkreli has no formal scientific training and no experience working a laboratory setting, and he does not explain why he cannot continue to develop and discuss any ideas he may have about COVID-19 from prison, as he has," Smith wrote.
Probation officials agreed, according to Smith's filing, writing that his "belief that he can develop a cure for COVID-19, something that has so far eluded the best medical and scientific minds in the world working around the clock, is not only a practice in wild and completely unfounded speculation, but is indicative of the same kind of delusional self-aggrandizing behavior that underlies the defendant's conduct in the commission of the instant offense."
Because of Shkreli's history—he became widely known, and often scorned, as "Pharma Bro" after increasing the price of a drug used in HIV/AIDS treatment by more than 5,000%—Smith argued that, even if he did find a COVID-19 cure, he might use it to "enrich himself to the maximum extent possible, including by concealing his work or declining to provide such a cure to others unless he were paid an exorbitant sum."
Smith also rejected Shkreli's arguments for release on medical grounds, arguing that the 37-year-old is in "excellent physical health." His Pennsylvania prison had no confirmed cases of coronavirus as of midday Wednesday, according to the Bureau of Prisons, and Smith wrote that Shkreli's proposal to serve home confinement in New York City would not make sense while the city is an epicenter of the virus.
Brafman had argued that Shkreli's asthma and "severe allergies" put him at risk for COVID-19, but prosecutors found that Shkreli had not mentioned any asthma before, Smith wrote. Smith also disputed the idea that his allergies were "severe," writing that he took Claritin for seasonal allergies prior to sentencing but had not sought treatment in prison.
Shkreli's conduct in prison has not helped his argument for early release, either, Smith argued.
"Shkreli's multiple disciplinary infractions while incarcerated … demonstrate that Shkreli continues to believe that the rules do not apply to him," she wrote.
If Shkreli was allowed to leave prison for home confinement at his fiancee's New York City apartment, Smith argued that violations would be hard to detect and returning Shkreli to prison could put other inmates at additional risk for COVID-19.
The case is assigned to U.S. District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: Simpson Thacher and ACLU Team To Challenge Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law
Should It Be Left to the Plaintiffs Bar to Enforce Judicial Privacy Laws?
7 minute readTwo Judges. 60-Plus Years on the Bench. Plenty of Advice.
Trending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250