Heck of a deal: The Sacklers

[watu05]

Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos fame reported to jail today for defrauding several VC's, Walmart, and several wealthy investors with false claims about Theranos' capabilities. I thought that was a good outcome and frankly about time. But also today the Sackler family had their freedom from further liability confirmed. All Sacklers did was addict millions of Americans to opiods to make tens and tens and tens of billions leaving the US to deal an of of control addiction problem that will go on for decades or perhaps forever. But in a deal negotiated in part with the Trump DOJ, they will face no further liability.

Elizabeth Holmes problem was that she that while she was rich on paper based on an inflated valuation of her company, she wasn't wealthly enough to tap into the tens of billions needed to buy hoardes of lawyers, former DOJ attorneys, and swing real political heft through donations. Those she hurt were sophisticated and wealthy on at least her level if not more. So she staved off the outcome for years, but couldn't make it go away.

The Sacklers scam, however, fed on the poor and everyday joes which had aleady earned them the billions needed to hire the best attorneys, consultants, and policians to work out their heck of a deal. The deal allows the Sacklers to give a portion of their wealth to the states to help pay for addiction programs, keep the rest, and oh, have no further financial liability. Criminal charges could still be brought, but that's not going to happen either. A system that requires criminals who are caught to pay an admittedly steep fines but keep most of their faudulent gains is not going to provide much deterence.

It's a sad reflection of our system that those with billions have their legal environment that even the merely wealthy cannot tap into. Below that system is another for the merely wealthy and below that are additional legal evironments distinguished largely by the income of its inhabitants.

I almost feel sorry for Elizabeth Holmes because the Sackers deserve to be an jail for the rest of their lives, but she is the one going inside.

 

[lawpoke87]

1). Elizabeth Holmes defrauded investors out of hundreds of millions of dollars and deserves to be in jail

1). Biden’s DOJ can criminal charge tbe Sacklers. Of course the Sacklers gave over $100k to the Dem party ahead of the 2020 election so as you stated money does buy perks….regardless of party. That said, in this case I believe the lack of criminal charges is fact based instead of money based.

 

[watu05]

1). Elizabeth Holmes defrauded investors out of hundreds of millions of dollars and deserves to be in jail

Agreed, but had she been wealthier she could have paid her way out of it. As it was, she had time to get married and have babies.

1). Biden’s DOJ can criminal charge tbe Sacklers. Of course the Sacklers gave over $100k to the Dem party ahead of the 2020 election so as you stated money does buy perks….regardless of party. That said, in this case I believe the lack of criminal charges is fact based instead of money based.

The Sackler deal was negotiated and worked out with the Trump DOJ which also refused to pursue criminal charges. That was the deal a federal appeals court finally confirmed today. The Sacklers played both sides of the field for years, but the DOJ decisions likely cost a lot more than a mere $100M.

From 2020:
https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...s-to-8b-settlement-with-trump-administration/

 

[lawpoke87]

Agreed, but had she been wealthier she could have paid her way out of it. As it was, she had time to get married and have babies.

The Sackler deal was negotiated and worked out with the Trump DOJ which also refused to pursue criminal charges. That was the deal a federal appeals court finally confirmed today. The Sacklers played both sides of the field for years, but the DOJ decisions likely cost a lot more than a mere $100M.

From 2020:
https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...s-to-8b-settlement-with-trump-administration/

The Sacklers deal specifically excluded any protection against criminal prosecution. The Biden Justice Dept could charge them tomorrow if they were so inclined. They of course won’t.

Holmes was very connected politically. Her problem was she either stole from or pissed those political allies off.

 

[watu05]

Walmart skated too.

Walmart Was Almost Charged Criminally Over Opioids. Trump Appointees Killed the Indictment.

Even as company pharmacists protested, Walmart kept filling suspicious prescriptions, stoking the country’s opioid epidemic. A Republican U.S. Attorney in Texas thought the evidence was damning. Trump’s political appointees? Not so much.

www.propublica.org

 

[lawpoke87]

Walmart skated too.

Walmart Was Almost Charged Criminally Over Opioids. Trump Appointees Killed the Indictment.

Even as company pharmacists protested, Walmart kept filling suspicious prescriptions, stoking the country’s opioid epidemic. A Republican U.S. Attorney in Texas thought the evidence was damning. Trump’s political appointees? Not so much.

www.propublica.org

Story is well over 3 years old. Asking the same question I did re the Sacklers….if there’s a strong criminal case here why hasn’t the Biden Admin DOJ brought charges? Plenty of time left in the statute of limitations and charges don’t have to be brought in Texas as the allegations are nationwide distribution.

You’re posting fact patterns where both Pub and Dem DOJ have refused to prosecute but alleging corruption by only one of the two.

 

[watu05]

You missed my point about there being layered levels of justice in our system that is tied to how wealthy one is. Your initial response was to blame the current administration by tying a claim about Sackler donations as if they were something new.

Yes, the Sacklers should have been prosecuted long ago and there are still some pushing for it as the depth of the damage OxyContin had done is revealed. I have no idea what the longer term implications of not bringing the suit immediately were, but when the Sacklers were under the most scrutiny by the DOJ, they were aided by the political appointees at the DOJ.

Walmart was another deep pocket that skated again with the help of political appointees at the DOJ.

You might want to read the excellent book: The Empire of Pain to learn more. There's a new book and a Netflix series coming out this summer.

 

[lawpoke87]

You missed my point about there being layered levels of justice in our system that is tied to how wealthy one is. Your initial response was to blame the current administration by tying a claim about Sackler donations as if they were something new.

Yes, the Sacklers should have been prosecuted long ago and there are still some pushing for it as the depth of the damage OxyContin had done is revealed. I have no idea what the longer term implications of not bringing the suit immediately were, but when the Sacklers were under the most scrutiny by the DOJ, they were aided by the political appointees at the DOJ.

Walmart was another deep pocket that skated again with the help of political appointees at the DOJ.

You might want to read the excellent book: The Empire of Pain to learn more. There's a new book and a Netflix series coming out this summer.

I’m not the one who brought partisanship into the discussion nor implied one side was “bought off”. I was simply pointing out (and correctly so) that both a Pub and Dem Admin have refused to prosecute these individuals. You are correct about money and political influence. No argument from me there. However, in the cases you’re citing the money and influence have either affected both parties OR the facts don’t lend itself to criminal convictions of individuals acting on behalf of a corporate entity.