Martin Shkreli ordered to give up $7.4 million, including his one-of-a-kind Wu Tang Clan album

Originally published at:


“after he pays the fine he’ll still have $27.1 million.”

world’s largest commissary account.


He was WARNED that Wu-Tang Clan ain’t nuttin ta fuck wit, but did he listen?


Almost everybody can be good at something.
Most punchable?

1 Like

Oh, this inexcusable behavior simply will not stand.


this photo…ye gods…he is so freaking punchable!!! I just wanna smash his face in!


it should be stated…regardless of the number of buttons it is also always acceptable to button none of them while standing.

Not to bring the ruckus, but didn’t this decision happen back around XMas?

Does that mean it’s just now being enforced?

Seems like someone needs to get to work on filing a civil suit, then; bleed that fucker dry.


leak when?

1 Like

Why not just take it all from him? He’s a convicted criminal, why should he be allowed to retain any assets?

Take his house, take his car, take his trust fund and all his investments. let him keep his job and his freedom but make him live in public housing and take transit to work. I am sure that if that was the standard punishment for fraud, we’d see a whole hell of a lot less white collar crime.


While viscerally I want to scream" hell yeah" that logic can be turned around on us regular folk and would.
Right now it’s in the form of civil asset forfiture


My understanding is that $7.4 million was related to his criminal charges. We’ll see what if anything he has left after the inevitable civil suits from the investors he defrauded are resolved.


I was worried! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Pretty good deal for Shkreli to get to surrender the Wu Tang Clan album as part of the settlement. He bought it mostly out of spite and I doubt he could have gotten his money back out of it, but hey, I’ll contribute that at my basis against my fine? That works.

1 Like

But if you’re not supposed to button them, why are they there?


Wait, so the judge can impose the fine, obviously, but can the judge specify which assets he must use to pay it? I am confuse.

1 Like

That juror who was rejected for stating that he couldn’t be objective because Shkreli “disrespected the Wu-Tang Clan” must be smiling today.


But didn’t he sell it in September?

1 Like

My wife told me not to button. She was in tech, maybe that’s why(?)

Just a reminder:

  1. He wasn’t jailed over any of the truly evil things that he did. Those are all still legal, and still Senator Manchin’s daughter’s primary source of income (along with many, many others).

  2. No one would have investigated him for anything (and certainly wouldn’t have tried him) if he hadn’t committed the unpardonable crime of telling the truth about how he made his money.

But something, something, Wu-Tang, let’s all pat ourselves on the back.