Jury in Martin Shkreli Fraud Trial Has Questions for the Judge

Jury in Martin Shkreli Fraud Trial Has Questions for the Judge
Prosecutors also say that at Retrophin, a pharmaceutical company he founded, Mr. Shkreli arranged to pay the defrauded MSMB investors by creating fake agreements making it look
like the investors were consulting for Retrophin, or signing settlement agreements requiring Retrophin to pay the investors, when Retrophin had no such responsibility.
A center of Mr. Brafman’s defense was that Mr. Shkreli didn’t intend to commit fraud, and he said in his closing argument
that “good faith can, in this case, be a complete defense to every one of the charges.” He asked why Mr. Shkreli would have bothered going on to repay the MSMB investors when he could have just walked away, and argued Mr. Shkreli didn’t really profit from the scheme at all
The note seemed to be a good sign in the defense’s eyes; Mr. Shkreli’s lawyer, Benjamin Brafman, gave a quick smile after reading it,
and after he spoke to Mr. Shkreli, Mr. Shkreli also gave a little smile.
The questions were: “Do assets under management refer to a particular fund being described, or to all assets managed
by the portfolio manager/general partner?” They also asked for a legal definition of assets under management.
The first substantive note from jurors in Martin Shkreli’s fraud trial asked
on Tuesday about assets under management and what “fraudulent intent” meant.
Prosecutors argued he lied to investors in two hedge funds, MSMB Capital and MSMB Healthcare, by making claims like the one
that he was using a specific auditor and law firm, when he wasn’t.