

Court Unanimously Denies Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes' Request For Rehearing (cnbc.com) 57
Elizabeth Holmes has lost her bid to have the appeal of her 2022 fraud conviction reheard by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, leaving the U.S. Supreme Court as her final option. She and former Theranos executive Sunny Balwani remain liable for $452 million in restitution, while Holmes continues serving her 11-year sentence. CNBC reports: The 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals denied Holmes' request for a rehearing before the original three-judge panel that upheld her conviction. At the same time, the court said no judge on the circuit court had asked for a vote on whether to have the full court rehear the appeal.
Holmes, 41, was sentenced in January 2023 to 11 years and 3 months in prison after being found guilty of four counts of wire fraud in January 2022. She was found guilty of deceiving investors about the capabilities of Theranos, the blood-testing company she founded in 2003. The company crumbled after a Wall Street Journal story outlined the firm's struggles and shut down in 2018.
Holmes, 41, was sentenced in January 2023 to 11 years and 3 months in prison after being found guilty of four counts of wire fraud in January 2022. She was found guilty of deceiving investors about the capabilities of Theranos, the blood-testing company she founded in 2003. The company crumbled after a Wall Street Journal story outlined the firm's struggles and shut down in 2018.
She joins a very exclusive club (Score:5, Insightful)
Here in America you can rip off all the little ladies you want but if you make a fool out of somebody with a billion dollars your ass is grass. She's honestly lucky she's not going to die in prison.
Just like how nobody cared how many peasant girls countess bathory killed but as soon as she went after Noble girls she was bricked up.
Re: (Score:2)
"Bottom line the baby boomers have been in charge for the last 30 years. Everything wrong in this world was caused by and is on them."
Bottom line, I'm a bigot.
"If you don't like it fix it stop voting for psychopaths because they have fun rallies and hot blonde chicks in tight sweaters on their news programs."
A bigot who cannot even avoid contradicting myself in consecutive sentences.
You're replying to a bot (Score:1)
The stuff about the baby boomers though did come from me. The boomers have been in charge for 30 years at least I think we're going on 40 now that
Re: You're replying to a bot (Score:2)
Is there evidence that boomers voted massively for Trump? I generally dislike the use of generational conflict in politics, I think it is mostly used to divide people (a bit like a wedge issue). I mean, Bernie Sanders is a boomer, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel aren't. The only person I know who voted for Trump is a millennial.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it was ~45% democrat and ~55% republican from what I've read.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there evidence that boomers voted massively for Trump? I generally dislike the use of generational conflict in politics, I think it is mostly used to divide people (a bit like a wedge issue). I mean, Bernie Sanders is a boomer, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel aren't. The only person I know who voted for Trump is a millennial.
Bernie Sanders was born in 1941, not a boomer, but Silent Generation. Elon Musk, born in 1971 - generation. X. Peter Theil born in 1967 - Generation X .
The whole idea that the world was a perfect place until the so called Boomers came along is largely based on the need for younger people have a blame target - always has been this way, the young blame the elders. Hopefully the Millenials and GenZ will be up to the hate they get when they are older!
So Boomers get the blame for things that "The Greatest
You're missing the strategy here (Score:2)
Discussion seems to be missing the real plan.
If she can get enough publicity the YOB may notice her and send her a pardon.
Re: (Score:3)
nobody cared how many peasant girls countess bathory killed
Wow. Had to go back to the 16th century for that one, huh? Until a few years ago, you had grooming gangs using little white girls all over the UK, and no one cared at all. They still don't. Caring means looking at certain unseeable demographic peculiarities.
If you're going to make shit up (Score:1)
And no matter how much you suck up to Trump he's not going to let you join in on the Epstein parties. And if you try to throw one yourself you going to go to jail. And it still won't be a drag queen.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Until a few years ago, you had grooming gangs using little white girls all over the UK
Do you mean Catholics, or The Aristocracy?
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, this [bbc.com].
The inquiry into the Telford abuse scandal, which published its report in 2022, found police dismissive of claims of abuse, with one saying "these girls had chosen to go with, I don't know, 'bad boys'".
Another reported "[Child] has no credibility - very often it is her word aginst [sic] the perpetrators and very often she does not co-operate."
"Believe she is making life choices. There are never any witnesses or 3rd parties."
Because children, often from deprived backgrounds, were dismissed as "lacking in credibility" their abusers were allowed to get away with subjecting them to horrific abuse, for too long.
Re: (Score:2)
She took money from rich people in the wrong way.
Re: (Score:2)
People take money from rich people all the time without consequences, that's how venture capital works. She took money from rich people in the wrong way.
She got caught up in a storm. Her original idea had merit, but a fatal flaw. However, the checkbox people wanted "The first self made female billionaire". That was obvious in so many interviews on News Channels. They concentrated on that, Theranos was almost an incidental thing.
So her persona that she cultivated was an added inducement. Sort of like "She dressed like Steve Jobs, so she must be good!"
So the prominent people who wanted that first self made female billionaire, pretty much threw money at Th
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Whether or not your rant about rich people is true, she fully deserved every year of her sentence. I don't excuse her ONE BIT for ripping off "the evil rich people." She also hurt a whole lot of regular people, either tricking them into thinking they were disease-free, or tricking them into thinking they had diseases they didn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether or not your rant about rich people is true, she fully deserved every year of her sentence. I don't excuse her ONE BIT for ripping off "the evil rich people." She also hurt a whole lot of regular people, either tricking them into thinking they were disease-free, or tricking them into thinking they had diseases they didn't.
Yes, she did deserve it.
In fact, I think that the people who were harmed by her machine's faulty premise played a huge part in her punishment. Venture capitalism has people losing money all the time.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Along with Bernie Madoff and George Santos she fucked with the real money people.
Here in America you can rip off all the little ladies you want but if you make a fool out of somebody with a billion dollars your ass is grass. She's honestly lucky she's not going to die in prison.
In this very specific case, that's not exactly what's going on. Holmes has a small number of followers to whom she is sort of a cult leader. One of whom is her husband. I'm honestly pretty shocked that before she finally reported to prison that he didn't grab her and the kids and try to flee to another country and ask for asylum. Her husband's family is quoted as saying that they don't know who he is anymore. And I've also seen some venture capitalists who said they would have no problem throwing
Re: (Score:2)
Holmes has a small number of followers to whom she is sort of a cult leader.
It's the crazy eyes.
Re: (Score:2)
Jon Corzine and MF Global fits the pattern too.
He stole from the little guys, got a stern talking to and a fine. You'll have to scroll way down to get the details. In the end the victims did get their money back so there is that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
$452 million (Score:2)
How the F did they blow through $452 million in what .. 5 years? That doesn't even seem possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Literally(*) peanuts, if you look at how much Meta and OpenAI are blowing through in a year...
(*) pedant martin here: Not literally of course, but a metaphor, transmogrified by modern usage....(sigh.)
Re: (Score:2)
(*) pedant martin here: Not literally of course, but a metaphor, transmogrified by modern usage....(sigh.)
Golly mister Martin, "modern usage" is ephemeral, dontcha no?
Re: (Score:2)
(*) pedant martin here: Not literally of course, but a metaphor, transmogrified by modern usage....(sigh.)
Golly mister Martin, "modern usage" is ephemeral, dontcha no?
I mean literally!
Re: (Score:2)
Hiring 800 people (Theranos peak), spending ~110 k on them per year over 5 years, gives this amount. Of course Theranos did not have 800 people continuously, and not all were high pay people, but they also had expensive R&D to pay for.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it gets pricey paying other companies to do all your lab results.
Re:Outdated (Score:4, Insightful)
She should have gotten life in prison.
Also, her crimes pale in comparison to what Trump commits on a regular basis.
Supreme Court not the final option (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If she got pardoned there then a US state could go after her?
Re:Supreme Court not the final option (Score:5, Interesting)
She committed these acts, and the fraud was discovered more than 7 years ago, so probably no state can go after her, unless they have already started proceedings. I'm sure in the event this offender managed to secure a pardon from the weirdo in the White house; by the time that happens it will be already
too late for the states to do anything.
Most states have a statute of limitations about 3 years for criminal fraud, Unless the fraud is tax evasion or defrauding the government
which has no time limit. I believe the state with the longest time period on that is Texas which is 7 years. They can begin prosecution for a Fraud that happened up to 7 years ago.
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldn't that go against "non bis in idem"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Supreme Court not the final option (Score:2)
You know he already called her and told her exactly what she needs to do to him to get a pardon. Be real here.
Re:Supreme Court not the final option (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the approach that the convicted founder of Nikola took. Donated money to Trump. Trump pardoned him. When Trump was asked about it, he said he didn't know much about the guy, but heard that he likes Trump. So, there is that. It appears that unless you actually murdered someone, a pardon can currently be purchased. And a little bit of ego stroking doesn't hurt either.
Re: Supreme Court not the final option (Score:1)
This wasn't just financial fraud (Score:3)
She risked peoples lives with her scam. She should never get out as a message to others.
Re: (Score:2)
Should and could are different things. She can purchase her freedom. "Donate" $1m to Trump and call him the best president ever. This is what the Nikola founder, who was also convicted of fraud, did. And it worked.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
She should never get out as a message to others.
And that is everything wrong with the legal system in America. You treat it as a punitive punishment alone rather than rehabilitation. The problem with this is when all punishment becomes extreme then there's no point in wasting time on small stuff.
Smoke a joint, go to prison, end up with a record that prevents me getting a job when I get out fucking my life up likely putting me in prison again. Why would I mess with that small shit when I can just kill a guy and get the same punishment.
She risked peoples lives with her scam.
As shitty as it is,
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes that's a great line from a whistle-blower who made those claims, and the courts specifically found her not guilty of that claim.
Which means we're back to emotion vs facts. We have a legal justice system that exists to make decisions beyond the soundbites put into the media. You may not like it, but that's precisely why its there, we don't punish people, even people as shitty as she is based only on feelings and claims that didn't ultimately get proven.
Re: (Score:2)
What ever happened to due diligence (Score:2)
She was foolish and possibly charlatan, but so are thousands of other inventors. I really don't get this story at all. Judge should let her go and scold on the numbskulls investing
Re: (Score:2)
special (Score:2)
She's special, not like other criminals.
Actual decision document (Score:2)
I hate it when legal stories don't post a link to the actual decision, since they are notoriously hard to find for new decisions.
https://storage.courtlistener.... [courtlistener.com]