Elizabeth Holmes convicted of fraud

[MrMobodies]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59734254

Elizabeth Holmes: Theranos founder convicted of fraud
Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes has been convicted of defrauding investors after a months-long landmark trial in California.
05/01/22

Holmes remains on bail before sentencing at a later date.

Prosecutors said Holmes knowingly lied about technology she said could detect diseases with a few drops of blood. Jurors found Holmes guilty of conspiracy to commit fraud against investors and three charges 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. Journalists inside the courtroom said the 37-year-old, who gave birth to her first child last year, showed little emotion when the verdicts were read out, and hugged her husband, Billy Evans, and her parents before leaving the courtroom.

Holmes 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. The three wire fraud charges she was found guilty of are tied to specific investors in her failed company. Wire fraud is a relatively wide-ranging federal crime in the US, which involves using electronic communications, such as emails, to make false statements to get something from another person - usually money.

Theranos, at one point valued at $9bn (£6.5bn), was once the darling of biotech and Silicon Valley. Holmes was able to raise more than $900m from billionaires such as media magnate Rupert Murdoch and tech mogul Larry Ellison. The firm promised it would revolutionise the healthcare industry with a test that could detect conditions such as cancer and diabetes with only a few drops of blood. But these 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. Calling some 30 witnesses, the prosecution sought to prove that Holmes knew the product she was selling to investors - a machine called the Edison - was a sham, but remained hell-bent on the firm's success.

Her company secretly relied on commercially available machines to run the tests, prosecutors said. At trial, multiple lab directors testified to telling Holmes about the flaws in Theranos' technology but being instructed to downplay their concerns. At the same time, they added , Holmes told investors the technology was operating as planned. Holmes "chose fraud over business failure. She chose to be dishonest with investors and patients", said prosecutor Jeff Schenk in closing arguments. "That choice was not only callous, it was criminal." The defence countered with descriptions of a dedicated and driven businesswoman, making waves in a male-dominated industry.

Testifying in her own defence, Holmes acknowledged mistakes in Theranos' operation, but maintained she never knowingly defrauded patients or investors. The defence also laid blame on Ramesh "Sunny" Balwani, her former business partner and ex-boyfriend. At trial Holmes accused Mr Balwani, 19 years her senior, of emotional and sexual abuse - allegations he denies.

So she is now claiming that it was Ramesh who knowingly defrauded the patients and investors despite being told by her own staff

The defence countered with descriptions of a dedicated and driven businesswoman, making waves in a male-dominated industry.

I wonder what has that got to do with anything in the sentencing? Are they saying that it makes it right for it she did or trying to make the jury feel sorry for her?

[Ed.Kloonk]

I don't think many people realize that subterfuge has always been this little one's way and always will be.

[eti]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

[Ed.Kloonk]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

I resisted commenting in your previous tantrum. I think the problem has to do with quantity of off-topic material from one poster versus a bit of side channel here and there.

Many of us have gotten pinged for it. Deal with it. Select more material the group will enjoy.

[wilfred]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

Some threads will inevitably develop into a private bun-fight between two members, regardless of whether it is on-topic or not. Some were started with that specific intent. Topics that engage forum members interest and friendly participation were never a problem. I wouldn't worry to much about whether a thread is on topic if members enjoy participating. I would say most members can tell which threads are which.

[MrMobodies]

I am sorry, do you want me to remove this thread?

I thought it might of been interesting considering there was equipment involved, the blood testing machines that didn't actually work properly where tests were faked and a follow up news about sentencing the individuals.

[Ed.Kloonk]

I am sorry, do you want me to remove this thread?

I thought it might of been interesting considering there was equipment involved, the blood testing machines that didn't actually work properly where tests were faked and a follow up news about sentencing the individuals.

There is already a EH thread floating around here that been following the horse foolery.

I thought it was that thread or that the title had been changed to represent the case development.

[magic]

do you want me to remove this thread?

No, he wants the mods to stop removing his threads

As Ed says, Theranos was a fairly regular topic here and nobody complained.

[wilfred]

I am sorry, do you want me to remove this thread?

Not at all. This is a topic I find interesting. @Magic hit the nail on the head.

[Simon]

I was surprised to hear her name finally mentioned in the media. I mean how long has this been going on with people making serious claims about her and her business?

What I find more relevant and worrying is not the financial aspect which is all the BBC can talk of (oh poor Rupert Murdok and the idiotic politicians that had fools made of them) but the fact that this sort of thing just lays the ground for yet more conspiracy theories and people doubting serious science whilst falling for fake stuff because they do not know any better and Theranos should never have existed. My understanding is that it was just a total lie from start to finish, that basically it was as good as claiming that an empty box was doing serious stuff.

[rstofer]

I haven't followed the media circus and the charges they throw around.  I suspect the reality is a good deal different.  She wanted the project to come to fruition before running out of money and got a wee bit too creative.  Such is the way in the tech world - it's all vaporware until it isn't.  Creating magic isn't cheap!

What if it had all worked out?  Would we have a national EH paid holiday?

[EEVblog]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

I resisted commenting in your previous tantrum. I think the problem has to do with quantity of off-topic material from one poster versus a bit of side channel here and there.

This.

And this case has actually been discussed on here before:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/where-did-all-the-theranos-money-go-and-did-they-actually-do-work/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/elizabeth-holmes-to-seek-mental-diseaseinsanity/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/theranos-elizabeth-holmes-sold-compilers-to-china/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/theranos-founder-elizabeth-holmes-charged-with-$700m-fraud/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/elizabeth-holmes-of-theranos-banned-from-owningoperating-medical-laboratory/

[Ed.Kloonk]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

I resisted commenting in your previous tantrum. I think the problem has to do with quantity of off-topic material from one poster versus a bit of side channel here and there.

This.

And this case has actually been discussed on here before:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/where-did-all-the-theranos-money-go-and-did-they-actually-do-work/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/elizabeth-holmes-to-seek-mental-diseaseinsanity/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/theranos-elizabeth-holmes-sold-compilers-to-china/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/theranos-founder-elizabeth-holmes-charged-with-$700m-fraud/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/elizabeth-holmes-of-theranos-banned-from-owningoperating-medical-laboratory/

Ha. And yet you've got some in the group that indeed want the subtopics separated and pigeon holed into sub fora.

Hmm.

[MrMobodies]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

I resisted commenting in your previous tantrum. I think the problem has to do with quantity of off-topic material from one poster versus a bit of side channel here and there.

This.

And this case has actually been discussed on here before:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/where-did-all-the-theranos-money-go-and-did-they-actually-do-work/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/elizabeth-holmes-to-seek-mental-diseaseinsanity/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/theranos-elizabeth-holmes-sold-compilers-to-china/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/theranos-founder-elizabeth-holmes-charged-with-$700m-fraud/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/elizabeth-holmes-of-theranos-banned-from-owningoperating-medical-laboratory/

I thought it was that thread or that the title had been changed to represent the case development.

I see, I just remembered that with the "subject" line that can be changed per post and just an idea maybe, can all the Theranos threads could be merged together from the oldest in one thread under a more common name to something like "Theranos/Elizabeth Homes FAQ" to represent them all with their individual subject lines?

This one sounds good but the thread is newer than the some of the others: "where did all the theranos money go and did they actually do work" - https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/theranos-founder-elizabeth-holmes-charged-with-$700m-fraud/

[Ed.Kloonk]

just an idea maybe, can all the Theranos threads could be merged together from the oldest in one thread under a more common name to something like "Theranos/Elizabeth Homes FAQ" to represent them all with their individual subject lines?

It sure can be done but I'm not brave enough to ask them to do it.

 

I'm grateful the topic gets a run. Some places, it is verboten.

The update subject feature used to be so the OP could add [solved] to a question. I don't know if I like the idea of the topic subject dancing around too much.

[Simon]

I don't know if it's a good idea to merge threads, if they are old and have not had responses in a while, let the die. If threads with postings on the same days are merged it may become more confusing with posts replying to the wrong post if there was not a quote and it may not be obvious to the reader what happened.

[daqq]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

Aside from this being covered previously, this does actually have to do with tech in a significant way, as it may set a precedent when dealing with scammy kickstarters, audiophile nonsense, existing BS tech, hopefully 'miracle healing machines'* and a host of other tech that is often discussed on this part of the forum: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/ .

* - https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/woo-equipment-repair-ethics/

[DrG]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

Aside from this being covered previously, this does actually have to do with tech in a significant way, as it may set a precedent when dealing with scammy kickstarters, audiophile nonsense, existing BS tech, hopefully 'miracle healing machines'* and a host of other tech that is often discussed on this part of the forum: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/ .

* - https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/woo-equipment-repair-ethics/

Oh how I wish for that, but I fear it is only the amounts of money lost and the status/influence of those that lost it, that brought this case through the system.

[Simon]

Yes, it is only the sheer scale of this that brought it to anyone's attention.

[Kasper]

Yet again, as others have delighted in making VERY clear to me, in the past, this is a *technical* chat sub-forum; am I missing something here, as this seems to be about as off-topic as one could hope for.

I don't think anyone delights in dealing with your plethora of off-topic rants.  If you want tolerance for your off-topic rants, you should show tolerance to others. 

This topic is very relevant to me since I work for tech startups.  One of the most challenging parts of my job is the constant requests for timelines and specs and the conversations that follow.  I am asked to give best case scenario: I race to put untested circuits in a design while breaking manufacturers recommendations because our industrial design prioritized looks over providing usable space, it all works, people stop requesting changes and I all of a sudden stop getting a bunch of random nonsensical tasks added to the top of my to do list.  I don't mind giving best case scenario as a way to explain how much time is wasted by things I consider low priority but I do mind when my best case scenario gets pushed forward.

I haven't seen any outright lies like Holmes seems to have made but there is a lot of optimism.

[Bud]

Holmes's conviction is just a half of the story. Her boyfriend's trial begins next month. Will be intetesting to watch.

[Gregg]

The only person close to Elizabeth Holmes that I can have any empathy towards is her newborn son who is just another part of her scheming business plan. 

[duckduck]

Theranos sold/leased/whatevered their black boxes to Walgreens (pharmacy/chemists chain in the USA) who put them in ~40 locations. There were real patients with real health problems that made real decisions based on the results from the Theranos boxes. Of course, I don't think it took Walgreens too long to figure out that the Theranos boxes were shit and ripped them all out, but still. What kind of a sociopath/psychopath would sell health solutions that they knew did not work? Makes me sick.

It's frustrating that she was convicted for swindling wealthy investors, not for causing chaos and panic for patients.

[Bud]

Patients were not allowed to testify because their testimony "would be based on emotions", something to that extent.

[SiliconWizard]

And maybe some memory would be good? Because you'd wonder how they could even "touch" patients outside of very strict clinical studies...

https://www.businessinsider.com/theranos-gets-fda-approval-2015-7?r=US&IR=T

... 
No comment.