Article content continued

“I think that today was a good day for Martin Shkreli,” defence lawyer Benjamin Brafman told reporters outside the courthouse after the brief proceeding, while his client stood silently beside him. The judge recognized the “complexity” of handling the case, he said. Shkreli may seek to try his case separately from Greebel’s, Brafman said. In a letter filed Monday, Brafman said that his client may pursue a “reliance of counsel” defence, meaning he might try and blame Greebel for his actions.

“We intend to proceed to trial,” Brafman said on Tuesday.

Public Criticism

Shkreli has suggested in interviews that the case against him was unfairly driven by public criticism over a price increase he implemented for anti-parasitic drug Daraprim. While he was CEO of Turing, the company acquired the rights to the drug, used to treat an infection which can be deadly to babies and AIDS patients, and raised the price to US$750 from US$13.50 per pill. The move, which drew fury from health-care advocates, patients and lawmakers, isn’t related to the securities allegations.

“My lawyers think that the timing is really coincidental,” Shkreli told Milo Yiannopoulos, tech editor for the conservative media outlet Breitbart, in a podcast last month.

Frequently clad in a hoodie and quick to quote rap lyrics, Shkreli has burnished his infamy by defending his decision to raise prices and savaging critics in Twitter posts, at one point calling federal lawmakers who were investigating him “imbeciles.” In other instances, he said it was his duty to make money for shareholders and that the revenue was needed for researching new medicines.

“Capitalism can seem ugly if you don’t understand it and you’re not prepared for it,” he told his roughly 115,000 Twitter followers April 12, 2016. “If you need comfort and care, I suggest adopting a puppy.”

The case is U.S. v. Shkreli, 15-cr-00637, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn).

— With assistance from Rebecca Spalding.

Bloomberg News