Martin Shkreli jailed after Facebook post about Hillary Clinton

[sun rise]

Putting him in jail for this would be stupid.
But it wasn't just this.
Know what's even stupider?
Posting jokes which could be construed as something else while out of jail on bail.

I do not judge it was a joke. It was stupid, to be sure, but not every stupid utterance is a joke.

 

[sun rise]

Here's the offending text I found on line....
"So on HRC's book tour, try to grab a hair from her... Will pay $5,000 per hair obtained."

The key word is "grab". That's a specific solicitation of assault.

 

[Nous]

I think that judges have entirely too much power in this country. Appeals courts should automatically review each decision by a federal judge the day after making a judgement to keep them honest. A federal judge can pretty much do whatever they want and that isn't right or acceptable to me.

The decision to revoke bail of a convicted felon on the basis of his repeated illegal activity is entirely within the discretion of the judge. This judge will never be found to have abused his discretion on this matter. When one has been convicted of a federal crime and is out on bail, one has to conform one's behavior to the law.

 

[Revoltingest]

I do not judge it was a joke. It was stupid, to be sure, but not every stupid utterance is a joke.

You believe it was a serious offer?

 

[Revoltingest]

The key word is "grab". That's a specific solicitation of assault.

That's a stretch.
One can "grab" a stray hair on a shoulder.
Had he said "cut", then you'd have a stronger case.
Still.....would a reasonable person believe that presenting
the detached strand of hair would really earn $5000?

 

[Nous]

That's a stretch.
One can "grab" a stray hair on a shoulder.
Had he said "cut", then you'd have a stronger case.

Judge Matsumoto doesn't need a “stronger case”. He isn't required to interpret the words in some way most favorable to Shkreli. According to the WaPo article, he had been harassing women online. He violated the conditions of his bail.

 

[blü 2]

None of the above. I definitely wouldn't feel comfortable bringing a case in front of a federal judge like you. Entirely too much power for one man.

But what alternative, exactly, do you have in mind?

Powerless judges? Optional guidance counselors?

How would it work?

 

[DavidFirth]

But what alternative, exactly, do you have in mind?

Powerless judges? Optional guidance counselors?

How would it work?

Maybe 3 judges instead of one, I haven't given it much thought.

 

[oldbadger]

What do you make of this?

Martin Shkreli jailed after Facebook post about Hillary Clinton

Should he have been jailed for this? Did he really overstep the boundaries of free speech?

If you are on Bail awaiting trial over very serious charges, and, in the words of the Judge “This is a solicitation of assault.".... then that is that!

Nobody has the right to incite folks to harass, victimise or assault other people. It's a crime.

 

[blü 2]

Maybe 3 judges instead of one, I haven't given it much thought.

Triple the cost of the first-level judiciary?

Or keep the present appellate system where you get three judges (or more) only if you need 'em?

 

[Revoltingest]

Judge Matsumoto doesn't need a “stronger case”. He isn't required to interpret the words in some way most favorable to Shkreli. According to the WaPo article, he had been harassing women online. He violated the conditions of his bail.

I didn't speak to the judge's decision, which (as I'd earlier pointed
out) was based upon more than this singular statement.
We all have our opinions whether it constituted a threat or not.

 

[DavidFirth]

Triple the cost of the first-level judiciary?

Or keep the present appellate system where you get three judges (or more) only if you need 'em?

I said maybe and that I haven't given it much thought, nor do I desire to since the government isn't going to do whatever I think, anyway. So what I think about it really doesn't matter.

 

[Nous]

Maybe 3 judges instead of one, I haven't given it much thought.

In other circumstances, it doesn't require multiple judges to decide if there is probable cause of a crime. There is no reason to believe that individual judges are incapable of making the same determinination in cases of someone who is out on bail.

 

[Nous]

We all have our opinions whether it constituted a threat or not.

You don't need an opinion on that. You should save your opinion-making organ for when you actually need it.

 

[Revoltingest]

You don't need an opinion on that. You should save your opinion-making organ for when you actually need it.

Nothing here is needed.
None of us is needed.
We're all here just opining.....even those who believe they have the inerrant Truth.
So I'll continue.
You'll endure.

 

[Nous]

Nothing here is needed.
None of us is needed.
We're all here just opining.....even those who believe they have the inerrant Truth.
So I'll continue.

You sound like you're not getting paid for your posts.

 

[Revoltingest]

You sound like you're not getting paid for your posts.

Staff say that I make more than double your wages.
If you upped your game, you might get a 10% raise.

 

[blü 2]

I said maybe and that I haven't given it much thought, nor do I desire to since the government isn't going to do whatever I think, anyway. So what I think about it really doesn't matter.

It's a matter for you, of course.

But you might like to give the courts and their place in your society some more mature thought.

 

[DavidFirth]

It's a matter for you, of course.

But you might like to give the courts and their place in your society some more mature thought.

Opinion noted.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

An unqualified offer of five grand to snatch a sample of someone's hair sounds like it to me.

You don't think that was tongue-in-cheek?