Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes To Stand Trial In 2020 (techcrunch.com) 125
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Elizabeth Holmes, the founder of the now-defunct biotech unicorn Theranos, will face trial in federal court next summer with penalties of up to 20 years in prison and millions of dollars in fines. Jury selection will begin July 28, 2020, according to U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila, who announced the trial will commence in August 2020 in a San Jose federal court Friday morning. Holmes and former Theranos president Ramesh "Sunny" Balwani were indicted by a grand jury last June with 11 criminal charges in total. Two of those charges were conspiracy to commit wire fraud (against investors, and against doctors and patients). The remaining nine are actual wire fraud, with amounts ranging from the cost of a lab test to $100 million. Bloomberg says Holmes' legal team plans to argue that The Wall Street Journal's John Carreyrou "had an undue influence on federal regulators," and "went beyond reporting the Theranos story."
"The jury should be aware that an outside actor, eager to break a story, and portray the story as a work of investigative journalism, was exerting influence on the regulatory process in a way that appears to have warped the agencies' focus on the company and possibly biased the agencies' findings against it," her attorneys wrote, per Bloomberg. "The agencies' interactions with Carreyrou thus go to the heart of the government's case."
"The jury should be aware that an outside actor, eager to break a story, and portray the story as a work of investigative journalism, was exerting influence on the regulatory process in a way that appears to have warped the agencies' focus on the company and possibly biased the agencies' findings against it," her attorneys wrote, per Bloomberg. "The agencies' interactions with Carreyrou thus go to the heart of the government's case."
good (Score:1)
this googly-eyed kewpie doll did a lot of damage
but did manage to separate fools from their money
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
None of these things are even remotely relevant to Theranos. Their problem was solely in the fact that their product idea was impossible to implement in a way that would be useful on the blood testing market due to the way human blood functions.
The only human factor that was involved in this failure was blinding greed that hit the investors.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Elizabeth Holmes, the founder of Theranos, is not a bright person.
The same is true of most criminals currently rotting in prison.
She is guilty, of course, but in this sham, Ms. Holmes became a puppet for the Pakistani scammer, Ramesh Balwani.
My sincere apologizes, must have had the org chart upside down this whole time.
Ramesh Balwani not only profited handsomely from the scam, he also got to fuck Elizabeth Holmes, for free.
Holmes looks, acts and sounds like a killer robot.
When you find yourself having to resort to wearing ear plugs AND using a paper bag you just might be better off hiring a hooker.
Re: (Score:2)
I know it is too much to ask that you bother to read THE ARTICLE, But FFS it is right there in the summary.
Delusional and with overweening ambition (Score:3)
Re:Delusional and with overweening ambition (Score:4, Interesting)
She was greedy to be a female Steve Jobs without an accompanying Steve Wozniak. She wanted to be it all.
Oh, just be patient and wait . . . she still has a year before the trial, and is out on the street.
So she will be able to set up another scam luring in gullible investors . . .
Why isn't she in jail until her trial? Black folks selling a small bag of weed would end up on death row.
Re: (Score:2)
She was greedy to be a female Steve Jobs without an accompanying Steve Wozniak. She wanted to be it all.
Oh, just be patient and wait . . . she still has a year before the trial, and is out on the street.
So she will be able to set up another scam luring in gullible investors . . .
Why isn't she in jail until her trial? Black folks selling a small bag of weed would end up on death row.
Actually, she's prohibited from doing a lot of things at this point,
Re:Delusional and with overweening ambition (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Delusional and with overweening ambition (Score:5, Insightful)
Or, as is far more often the case .... the prosecutors want to leverage the fact that you are locked up and cannot afford bail in order to get you to agree to a plea deal.
I don't think the GP is speaking literally (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Why isn't she in jail until her trial? Black folks selling a small bag of weed would end up on death row.
The goal should be to reduce the fuckedupness of the system until it's equally applied, not increase the fuckupedness until it's equally applied. Applying stupid bail conditions to one person does nothing to make stupid bail conditions applied to a different person better.
Re: (Score:2)
The goal should be to reduce the fuckedupness of the system until it's equally applied, not increase the fuckupedness until it's equally applied.
That would be a reasonable goal, yes. Unfortunately we don't live in a reasonable world. We live in an oligopoly. Therefore the way to fix the system is to maximize the fuckedupedness until it catches people exactly like this up in its fuckery: rich and well connected to other rich. Then and only then does the system get changed.
At least for a little while, the equal protection clause in the US Constitution is still operative, so they can't rewrite the law to fix the fuckedupedness only for themselves.
E
Re: (Score:1)
Keep in mind this started when she was relatively young, under the influence of Sunny Balwani. She was mentored into a sociopath (also her parents likely played a part), but she gets all the attention because she was put front and center. By all accounts, Sunny Balwani was the one who was more experienced, who created a culture of secrecy and paranoia within Theranos, and likely knew more about what he was doing. He was having an affair with Holmes since she was 19 (he was married at the time).
Holmes was
Re: (Score:3)
That's the thing - most of these tech billionairs are really just stupid, and lucky.
The guys who do the work mostly underappreciated, whilst the wide eyed tech guy gets all the attention. Steve Jobs had Woz and then a team of people to do the work, Holmes had nothing but a starry-eyed fantasy about changing the world (and being a superhero to it).
I saw the film made about this, the bit that struck me most was when she described how shed drawn a time machine when she was young, "that was really detailed", an
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Delusional and with overweening ambition (Score:4, Funny)
I still have a notebook with a complete design for a time machine that I designed when I must have been, like, seven. The wonderful thing about the way I was raised is that no one ever told me that I couldn’t do those things.”
From the New Yorker profile on her.
I am pleased that the design was complete! Don't want to leave out any important parts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Balwani had at least as much to do with it as Holmes. He was the driving force behind the fraud, she was the face out front (and had Daddy's connections).
Woman's privilege makes you look for the man behind the woman's failure to thrive. She fired him eventually, so who controlled whom?
Ah, yes. The press is to blame for me being a liar (Score:1)
Lying to make money is one thing.
Lying to make money by deceiving sick people is a whole other level of shittiness.
May the bitch rot in prison forever.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But what it really takes to get convicted and do jail time is lying to cheat rich people. If only little people are hurt, often the penalty is a fine and time served (if any).
Bernie Madoff got nailed because billionaires were among those who lost money.
Not a great plan (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not a great plan (Score:5, Funny)
So, you have defrauded you investors for billions of dollars and you defence is "And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for that meddling journalist". Surely your defence team can come up with something better, blame it on (flips excuse calendar) Immediate Encryption Underflow Signal.
I believe her defense is called the Scooby-Doo gambit.
Meh, the Chewbacca defense worked (Score:2)
That's the trouble with Jury trials, very few people can afford to take time off for one, especially a long one like this. So you get a bunch of retirees with borderline Alzheimer's and the odd student here and there.
As the saying goes, 12 people too dumb to get out of Jury duty.
Re: (Score:2)
You disgust me.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't need a good defense, you just need to confuse a jury of people mostly over 55 enough that they won't convict.
That's the trouble with Jury trials, very few people can afford to take time off for one, especially a long one like this. So you get a bunch of retirees with borderline Alzheimer's and the odd student here and there.
As the saying goes, 12 people too dumb to get out of Jury duty.
Spoken like one who has never served on a jury. Too smart, I suppose.
It will probably shock you to learn that there are many people who don't try to bullshit their way out of jury service, and who consider it a somewhat inconvenient civic duty. And there is no shortage of adults of what you would consider an acceptable age who are able to serve on juries for long trials without losing any wages -- they're called local, state, and Federal government employees. But then, I suppose you consider all of them stu
Re: (Score:3)
I was on a jury. Not because I was too stupid, but because I did not wish to tell lies during voir dire. So is it about not being smart enough to get out of jury duty, or not deceptive enough?
Re: (Score:2)
I was on a jury. Not because I was too stupid, but because I did not wish to tell lies during voir dire. So is it about not being smart enough to get out of jury duty, or not deceptive enough?
I've seen people lie during jury selection. They are one step away from being the person on trial. But they think they are smart. Just like the people on trial think they are smart.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need a good defense, you just need to confuse a jury of people mostly over 55 enough that they won't convict.
That's the trouble with Jury trials, very few people can afford to take time off for one, especially a long one like this. So you get a bunch of retirees with borderline Alzheimer's and the odd student here and there.
As the saying goes, 12 people too dumb to get out of Jury duty.
Spoken like one who has never served on a jury. Too smart, I suppose.
It will probably shock you to learn that there are many people who don't try to bullshit their way out of jury service, and who consider it a somewhat inconvenient civic duty. And there is no shortage of adults of what you would consider an acceptable age who are able to serve on juries for long trials without losing any wages -- they're called local, state, and Federal government employees. But then, I suppose you consider all of them stupid and easily confused as well, right?
I think it is projection.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need a good defense, you just need to confuse a jury of people mostly over 55 enough that they won't convict. That's the trouble with Jury trials, very few people can afford to take time off for one, especially a long one like this. So you get a bunch of retirees with borderline Alzheimer's and the odd student here and there. As the saying goes, 12 people too dumb to get out of Jury duty.
Yeah, that's nice. Seems your definition of "Dumb" includes people that are happy to do their civic duty. Well good for you. It's a civic duty, it's like voting, part of the process of being an American - but okay, I have now formed my opinion of you as an American.
Re: (Score:1)
I really hope she gets jail time. Even now she refuses to admit she is a fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So, you have defrauded you investors for billions of dollars and you defence is "And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for that meddling journalist".
Yes, "shooting the messenger," a millenial prescription for blaming the bringer of bad news. Lame and illogical, but consider the audience.
Carreyrou's "Undue influence on federal regulators (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Carreyrou's grip on diagnostic testing is laughable, the WSJ was also very unwilling to report the story she might as well blame Rupert Murdoch for the demise of her pink unicorn and helpful goons at boles schiller llp.
Re:Carreyrou's "Undue influence on federal regulat (Score:4, Interesting)
I know exactly where the genesis of this defense came from. Elizabeth has always been convinced the reason Theranos failed was not due to the lack of working tech or fraud but instead because investors and the industry prematurely pulled the plug on the company, which she attributes to Carreyrou's reporting. She convinced herself Theranos was always just one engineering breakthrough away from getting the blood tester working, and from that enduring belief she rationalized to herself how it was ok to the lie to investors and customers, because the product would right itself eventually. I call it sociopathic hope.
Yes - she is definitely a sociopath.
It is strange how she managed to con so many people. Before any of the bad stuff broke, I saw her on the cover of Time or Newsweek - not certain - but just from that picture, I could read "Con artist" just looking at the eyes.. That was only reinforced when I heard the obviously fake baritone voice she used. Which to me made her sound kind of stupid.
But really -what happened?
Attractive woman - this makes some guys stupid
Health oriented scam - probably attracts both women and men.
An amazing machine that takes a teeny tiny bit of blood, and dilutes the hell out of it, then runs a shitload of tests while you wait at the drug store. Gee, why didn't anyone think of this before?
She hit on a very pursuasive scam, but anyone with a bit of science background could tell it wasn't at all likely to work, and anyone with a bit of social intelligence could see the giveaway sociopath eyes.
Re: (Score:2)
I could read "Con artist" just looking at the eyes.
Wow! So you have special powers? How cool is that?
Everyone has that ability. So do you. Con artists are just experts at finding people's weaknesses and exploiting them.
Never heard of human lie detectors? https://www.artofmanliness.com... [artofmanliness.com] kind of a strange website, but a fair description. And here's the kicker. Holmes was using her knowledge of people to engage in a counter activity, the eye shielding that many liars engage in. So she holds her eyes unnaturally open in an attempt to look like she is being open.
So yes, It is pretty easy to see that we ha
Re: (Score:2)
That's the kind of false belief that will make you an easy mark too. Remember the "con" in "con artist" is short for "confidence" as in the entire game is lulling their marks into a false sense of confidence.
And if one puts confidence in no one? How does my Human lie detector approach make me an easy mark?
My weakness is if someone who has earned my trust - and that is like 3 people on earth - decides to betray me for some strange reason - that can happen. We can't foresee all. Otherwise, perhaps a weak moment. But I am quite attached to my money, and prying it out of my hands is really difficult.
But I go into any situation, assuming that the person I am dealing with intends me harm in one way or another.
Re: (Score:2)
Self-Deceit is a form of Self-Soothing (Score:1)
Almost as importantly, she actually believes what she is shoveling.
That's a baseline attribute of narcissistic personality disorder. Part of the disorder is that "truth" is entirely malleable, it is whatever the disordered mind needs it to be in the moment. And in that moment they absolutely believe it whole-heartedly. Maybe tomorrow they need to believe something else and so they will, with just as much conviction.
One of the working theories about the development of narcissistic personality disorder is that in childhood they had no nurturing parent that they could co
She's some billionaire's god daughter (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Her claimed breakthrough machine should sound perfectly plausible to the layperson. It boils down to "My machine does what existing ones do, but it does it faster, smaller and cheaper." That really matches up with expected advances in technology. If time has given smaller, better computers, and phones, batteries, cameras, earphones, why not blood testers? Only someone who is actually familiar with blood analysis would have recognized the difficulty in achieving the claimed advances.
Still, anyone considering
Re: (Score:2)
Her claimed breakthrough machine should sound perfectly plausible to the layperson. It boils down to "My machine does what existing ones do, but it does it faster, smaller and cheaper." That really matches up with expected advances in technology. If time has given smaller, better computers, and phones, batteries, cameras, earphones, why not blood testers? Only someone who is actually familiar with blood analysis would have recognized the difficulty in achieving the claimed advances.
Still, anyone considering investing should have at least consulted an expert in the field.
She is a text book example of how a con artist works. Aside from obvious due diligence that the potential investor needs to make, there are many tells that con artists make. The con artist preys first upon greed. This was obvious from her pretending to be a female Steve Jobs. There were people who were anxious to have her be the first self made female billionaire. There were people who wanted to be in on this great new maghine that was a miracle box. They wanted the wonderful greedy things so many want.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you don't pitch and run a startup without at least some degree of a conman's skill. This sort of confidence game is plentiful in the social media startup industry, but people don't get as worked up about it because deep down they know the product is just perception and entertainment and nothing serious. But do the con job with a medical device and the suspension of disbelief is easily overcome.
Re: (Score:2)
I saw her on the cover of Time or Newsweek - not certain - but just from that picture, I could read "Con artist" just looking at the eyes..
Not certain? Let me spell that out for you, Olson. It's called misogyny. It's how the conservative mind operates when they don't see a woman standing behind a man.
It's Olsoc, coward. Yeah man - any time a man says something about a woman other than some version of "Women are superior to any man." betas like you come out of the weeds to try some manshaming. You've reached peak pathetic.
Sorry my testosteroneless friend, in a world where males and females are equal, criticism is allowed of both male and female.
Then again, you can be like the court Eunuch, here only for making us laugh. I thinik I'll call you Anonymoue Eunuch!
If you want to try the manshaming gam
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah man - any time a man says something about a woman other than some version of "Women are superior to any man." betas like you come out of the weeds to try some manshaming. You've reached peak pathetic.
Beta is getting a bit overused, don't you think? There are some perfectly reasonable beta males who don't rush to white knight a known fraudster.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah man - any time a man says something about a woman other than some version of "Women are superior to any man." betas like you come out of the weeds to try some manshaming. You've reached peak pathetic.
Beta is getting a bit overused, don't you think? There are some perfectly reasonable beta males who don't rush to white knight a known fraudster.
Well, I wanted to call AC a sexist asshole.
It's unfortunate that sexism is so rampant these days. I never said one thing about her genitalia, or the ability of a person who has female genitalia to run a company. But when we reach the point that a con artist is above criticism based on their whoo-hoo or peen, it is kind of a step backwards for women.
Re: (Score:1)
To be fair, her lawyers are hired to defend her. They have to come up with a strategy to argue down her punishment.
What's more relevant is if this is the best argument her lawyers can come up with, then she's in serious trouble. Her best outcome is a lia limited punishment and avoiding prison time, but if this is the best strategy her lawyers have, that outcome does not look good.
Re: (Score:3)
As stated, this is probably exactly correct- all that was missing was an engineering breakthrough. In this case, it was a principle upon which a device might operate. It'
Re: (Score:2)
She convinced herself Theranos was always just one engineering breakthrough away from getting the blood tester working
They were!. We're also one engineering breakthrough away from fusion power, hyper drives, quantum computers that break all known cryptography in seconds, and figuring out how to predict when TV remote batteries go flat.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
She should go to prison. (Score:1)
But so should Zuckerberg and Sandberg. None of them will ever see the inside of a jail cell.
soon to be a major (Score:2)
That trial date.... (Score:1)
...will unfortunately ruin her Burning Man vacation next year.
Henry Kissinger (Score:3)
Please, Kissinger was on her board. She'll be well protected.
It's just too bad for the Five Eyes that they didn't get microdroplet assays working before anybody else, so now their comprehensive DNA surveillance project is set back a few years.
With her connections, absolutely no chance (Score:3)
With her connections, absolutely no chance of a conviction. Law for thee but not for me. She's super plugged in in DC.
Dropout Podcast (Score:2)
There is a great podcast series called the Dropout [abcradio.com] that is totally worth a listen. I have been reading about the Theranos investigation since it was first published in the WSJ, and it's totally fascinating how many people were duped for so long with so many warning signs.
She faked her voice too (Score:2)