[gamblor956]

It's disturbing that Skreli openly committed massive financial fraud and you're more concerned about the government doing its job.

Skreli's investors didn't sue him because they profited from the fraud. It's the downstream investors who were harmed here, and they can sue Skreli...and the investors who profited from his fraudulent investments.

[nickysielicki]

The only thing Shkreli is guilty of is risk laundering. Nobody was defrauded. Everyone got paid. He made a huge (relatively stupid) bet that could have hurt a lot of people, but he lucked out and was able to make everyone whole. Actually, a lot of his "victims" made a lot of money.

> 4. How much did investors lose?

> Nothing. Shkreli partly repaid them with Retrophin stock and several witnesses told the jury they ended up with multimillion-dollar profits. One invested $1.25 million in Shkreli’s hedge fund, got $1.6 million back and 150,000 Retrophin shares, currently worth about $2.9 million. Another said she ended up with a $2.7 million profit from a $300,000 initial investment.

https://fortune.com/2017/08/05/why-martin-shkreli-is-guilty-...

[gamblor956]

People did lose money: most of the investors were out of money for years after the fraud, suffering actual economic harm, and even then were only partially made whole by Skreli giving out shares of his other company, which materially diluted that company's other shareholders. It was a sheer matter of luck that the other company's stock increased in value enough that some of the victims made profits, years after the original fraud.

From a legal perspective, it's irrelevant that on a long-enough time frame the victims ultimately ended up better off. That would be like saying that an attempted murder is a victimless crime if the hospital discovers that the victim has a fatal but removable brain cancer while treating their wounds from the assault.