Elizabeth Holmes: Theranos founder convicted of fraud
Discussion
article said:
Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes has been convicted of defrauding investors after a months-long landmark trial in California.
Prosecutors said Holmes knowingly lied about technology she said could detect diseases with a few drops of blood.
Jurors found Holmes guilty of four charges, including conspiracy to commit fraud against investors and three counts of wire fraud.
She denied the charges, which carry a maximum prison term of 20 years each.
Holmes was not taken into custody, with no date confirmed yet for sentencing and a further hearing scheduled next week.
She faced 11 charges in total and was found not guilty of four charges relating to defrauding the public.
The split verdict came after the judge said the jury, having deliberated for seven days, could deliver a partial verdict after being unable to reach consensus on another three counts.
Theranos, at one point valued at $9bn (£6.5bn), was once the darling of Silicon Valley.
The firm promised it would revolutionise the healthcare industry, but its claims began to unravel in 2015 after a Wall Street Journal investigation reported that its core blood-testing technology did not work.
For nearly four months at trial, the jury of eight men and four women were presented with two starkly different accounts of the former self-made billionaire, whose downfall shook Silicon Valley.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-5973425...Prosecutors said Holmes knowingly lied about technology she said could detect diseases with a few drops of blood.
Jurors found Holmes guilty of four charges, including conspiracy to commit fraud against investors and three counts of wire fraud.
She denied the charges, which carry a maximum prison term of 20 years each.
Holmes was not taken into custody, with no date confirmed yet for sentencing and a further hearing scheduled next week.
She faced 11 charges in total and was found not guilty of four charges relating to defrauding the public.
The split verdict came after the judge said the jury, having deliberated for seven days, could deliver a partial verdict after being unable to reach consensus on another three counts.
Theranos, at one point valued at $9bn (£6.5bn), was once the darling of Silicon Valley.
The firm promised it would revolutionise the healthcare industry, but its claims began to unravel in 2015 after a Wall Street Journal investigation reported that its core blood-testing technology did not work.
For nearly four months at trial, the jury of eight men and four women were presented with two starkly different accounts of the former self-made billionaire, whose downfall shook Silicon Valley.
Fake it till you make it....oh well.
It’s been a fascinating case and case study actually. I’ve no idea if anyone has followed her story or the trial, but the size of this is just fairly staggering. Theranos really was touted as changing the world back a few yrs ago, this lass was Elon before Elon and the big boys doted on her.
Stigproducts said:
She won't be sentenced for months. I'll have a tenner she will either top herself or do a runner. You can simply walk across the border in Tijuana and no one bats an eyelid, no papers, nothing.
Odd ahe is not in custody already really and with a $9bn company at one point you have to assume she stashed some cash. She is facing 20 years per count so could die in jail. My guess is she will do a deal and testify agaist her former partner to get it downDeejRC said:
It’s been a fascinating case and case study actually. I’ve no idea if anyone has followed her story or the trial, but the size of this is just fairly staggering. Theranos really was touted as changing the world back a few yrs ago, this lass was Elon before Elon and the big boys doted on her.
I've been following this story for around four years. It was truly fascinating. Read "Bad Blood" by John Carreyrou. It's the definitive book on the subject. He's the journalist who first broke the story in The Wall Street Journal.
I've read the book and seen the documentary but I'm still not totally sure whether it was a con from the start, or whether she genuinely believed that producing the blood testing equipment was just a case of solving some minor technical issues and went from optimism through typical silicon valley hype to outright fraud. First of all I thought she started of as genuine, but given the complete lack of biotech experience on her board I'm tending towards deliberate fraud. Maybe she thought she could sell out for billions before anyone noticed.
Her product seemed like one that would revolutionize medical diagnosis....so why had no one else tried to do it....cos maybe it's a bit more complex. I suspect it was bright idea suddenly loads of funding and hey we have billions maybe we can do it or at least tell then we can till we work it out
Dr Jekyll said:
I've read the book and seen the documentary but I'm still not totally sure whether it was a con from the start, or whether she genuinely believed that producing the blood testing equipment was just a case of solving some minor technical issues and went from optimism through typical silicon valley hype to outright fraud. First of all I thought she started of as genuine, but given the complete lack of biotech experience on her board I'm tending towards deliberate fraud. Maybe she thought she could sell out for billions before anyone noticed.
I'm inclined to agree. I think she started off well intentioned and then got in way over her head (and skills) until it became fraudulent to her clients and her investors (who should have done more due diligence)She just wasn't good enough at the pump, or making useful contacts, or at churning out a half hearted product while endlessly promising crates of jam tomorrow. Or the ultimate protection - 'stock price bro'/too big to fail.
Bit more effort and she'd have had a slap on the wrist - if that. Could even have still been running as a lauded visionary...
Bit more effort and she'd have had a slap on the wrist - if that. Could even have still been running as a lauded visionary...
I was put on to this https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-dropout/... some time ago and been following the trial.
Listening to recordings from her deposition and then recordings from evidence was fascinating.
An example would be her claiming when being deposed, that she never claimed that her devices were currently in use within the army and particularly, Afghanistan. This would then be followed by recordings of her saying just that in presentations - but obviously very carefully in the manner of someone trying to say something clearly without actually saying ‘Yes, they are currently’.
With hindsight, I think I will find the book exposing her and the HBO documentary!
Guilty as Sin!
Just as the Jury found.
Ps - when the trial diary was moved around due to Mattis unexpectedly being local and available to give evidence, on being questioned, he suggested he starts everyday of his life and career believing the people in front of him.
Listening to recordings from her deposition and then recordings from evidence was fascinating.
An example would be her claiming when being deposed, that she never claimed that her devices were currently in use within the army and particularly, Afghanistan. This would then be followed by recordings of her saying just that in presentations - but obviously very carefully in the manner of someone trying to say something clearly without actually saying ‘Yes, they are currently’.
With hindsight, I think I will find the book exposing her and the HBO documentary!
Guilty as Sin!
Just as the Jury found.
Ps - when the trial diary was moved around due to Mattis unexpectedly being local and available to give evidence, on being questioned, he suggested he starts everyday of his life and career believing the people in front of him.
Gecko1978 said:
My guess is she will do a deal and testify against her former partner to get it down
I'm not sure that's likely from what I've read in the Maxwell case. Apparently deals are normally done to implicate those further up the food chain, and in this case she is the main player, with Sunny Balwani admittedly as a close second. I suspect the prosecutors are pretty confident they already have enough to convict him without doing a deal.I'm fascinated by large scale financial fraud and have been following this case for ages (book, film,podcasts etc); it amazes me that really smart, shrewd investors like Rupert Murdoch piled into this company without any real due diligence, and continued to believe for some time after, mainly on the strength of Holmes' fake personae.
If she was in the UK I think she would be looking at anywhere between 5-10 years in jail, given her character, which feels about right, but who knows given this is the US......? I doubt she will get anything close to 20 years though.
I don't understand how the company got as big as it did with a product that clearly didn't work. At it's peak it had 800 employees, what exactly were they all doing, a percentage of them must have known what was really going on.
Why were these rich old men throwing hundreds of millions at this woman, is it only because they all fancied her?
Why were these rich old men throwing hundreds of millions at this woman, is it only because they all fancied her?
Joey Deacon said:
I don't understand how the company got as big as it did with a product that clearly didn't work. At it's peak it had 800 employees, what exactly were they all doing, a percentage of them must have known what was really going on.
Many tried to blow the whistle and were shut down by extremely aggressive lawyers.Even the Wall Street Journal were pressured.
example:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-whistleblowe...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff