Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes Denied Bid for New Trial (wsj.com) 64
A federal judge denied Elizabeth Holmes's bid for a new trial, the latest setback for the Theranos founder who was convicted of fraud in January. From a report: U.S. District Judge Edward Davila, who oversaw Ms. Holmes's trial which began last year, said in a ruling late Monday that the arguments in her three motions for a new trial didn't introduce material new evidence or establish government misconduct, adding that a new trial was unlikely to result in an acquittal.
Ms. Holmes is scheduled for sentencing on Nov. 18. Earlier Monday, a court probation officer submitted a presentence report, an investigation into Ms. Holmes's legal and personal background. The judge previously denied her request for an acquittal. He also denied requests for an acquittal and new trial from Ramesh "Sunny" Balwani, Ms. Holmes's former boyfriend and deputy at Theranos, who was found guilty on 12 counts of fraud and conspiracy in a separate trial that concluded in July.
Ms. Holmes is scheduled for sentencing on Nov. 18. Earlier Monday, a court probation officer submitted a presentence report, an investigation into Ms. Holmes's legal and personal background. The judge previously denied her request for an acquittal. He also denied requests for an acquittal and new trial from Ramesh "Sunny" Balwani, Ms. Holmes's former boyfriend and deputy at Theranos, who was found guilty on 12 counts of fraud and conspiracy in a separate trial that concluded in July.
Fake it till you make it (Score:2)
Re:She is a fraud... (Score:5, Insightful)
people more powerful than
She was the CEO, the buck to communicating with investors stops with her. Other people may be more powerful in general in the grand scheme of the world, but as far as committing fraud goes she is the single most important person in the case.
She's not being scapegoated.
Re:She is a fraud... (Score:5, Informative)
The sole job of the CEO is to be responsible for everything that happens in the company. All other authority within the company is delegated down from the CEO. If you set an unrealistic sales forecast and don't meet it because your sales team sucks or your product isn't good, the CEO didn't directly do anything that resulted in that, the bad engineers or the bad sales people did that. But the CEO is still responsible. If there's a sexual harassment issue in the company that creates a liability issue for the company, even if the CEO was oblivious to it happening the CEO is still responsible for it because they should have been paying attention, putting policies in place, setting corporate culture to ensure people can speak up and be taken care of etc.
If there's fraud, the CEO is responsible for that, even if they didn't commit it. Because it's your job to make sure that doesn't happen and put investors' money and value at risk.
In this case though, she did. She told investors they had a working system and faked the working system when they got a tour; that was testimony from many former employees. She rolled out a product that they knew wasn't ready that then tested patients inaccurately leading to misread results. That was testimony from many former employees. While a CEO is civilly responsible for things that happen under their watch, actual commitment of fraud is a criminal act. The investors and Board didn't commit the fraud.
The Board and the investors should know better and keep a tight reign on the CEO, but the truth is they don't work there every day and have controlled access to employees; they don't see those things. They have responsibility to shareholders for sure, but civil responsibility for not putting tools in place to detect fraud, not criminal liability for committing fraud like the CEO does. So the many others that allowed this to happen may be open to civil liability, but she and Balwani absolutely have criminal liability.
Re: (Score:1)
Did anyone ever find out what the deal with that was?
Re: She is a fraud... (Score:3)
Not really. She still denies that it's a fake voice. There are home videos of her talking in a normal voice and then practicing the fake one in the mirror and telling herself that just needs to do better at this and people will look at her like an adult rather than as a little girl. There's phone video of her at a party talking with a normal voice but slightly drunk then realizing and switching back to the deep one. Personality, I think that's enough to be certain it's fake, but I wouldn't stake money on it
Re: (Score:2)
Trustworthiness and image (Score:2)
For that matter, her dressing in a fashion to bring Steve Jobs to mind was entirely deliberate as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. The only reason a CEO can get out of their ultimate responsibility for _everything_ a company does, is of they were tricked themselves with some real sophistication. Their very job is to make sure they know what is going on and place control mechanisms. If they screw that up, it is on them.
As Holmes participated in the fraud knowingly, there really is no wiggle-room here. And there is absolutely no reason to go easy on her. She actively defrauded people and she did knowingly endanger lives. Just be
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. And while the investors were abysmally stupid and the press wrote demented nonsense about how great she was, she did go along with all this while being the CEO and hence needs to face the music. Fraud on this scale is not peanuts and a clear message needs to be sent. Also remember that people's lives were being endangered.
Re: (Score:2)
And while the investors were abysmally stupid
What is stupid is the thought that everyone needs to be an expert in every subject. Investors are people and they rely on external information. You're a technical person (though we disagree a lot it's clear you're a technical thinker) and that puts you in a different place for understanding issues and rooting out fraud.
But fraud legal frameworks exist precisely because not everyone is an expert. They rely on information from others. Whenever there's a new invention or something that is unique / changing the
Re: (Score:2)
“Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.” – Donald J. Trump
Re: (Score:2)
She's 38 year old, not 19 years old!
In your mind, is Mark Zuckerberg (who is 38 years old) also an endless 19-year old College dropout?
Or did he learn a few things between the time he started his company and now?
Re: (Score:2)
Zuck is certainly 19 years older, but based on recent performance the jury is still out on learning anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, he sure acts like one, so...
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed there are others who should be answering for this as well, but she is not a scapegoat. As CEO she was very definitely ultimately responsible.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, scapegoat is not the right word, it implies innocence. What I meant is she should not be the only one charged with a crime; there have to be others.
Re: (Score:2)
Who exactly? We know the people involved.
Re: (Score:2)
It stands to reason that the board of directors must have known that something is wrong; I might be underestimating her but seems to me the entire deception cannot have been held in her head alone.
Then you have that sleazy looking guy Sunny Balwani, her alleged boyfriend and clearly some sort of power player. Their supposed intimate relationship makes it very unlikely the details were kept hidden from him.
Those are at the very least the people for whom there should be the answer to what they knew and when t
Re: (Score:2)
It should make you feel good then to learn that Sunny Balwani was also convicted, and is still facing SEC fraud charges.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. I am guilty of reading news superficially.
It seems to me that the tech sector has lately been on a power trip where they think Zuck's "move fast and break things" mantra can apply to their targets as well, even if it is medical or food or heavy industry, where the cost of a mistake is much higher than screwing up facebook. That's why I think when it comes to Theranos' other power players we should be asking for their blood too, pun intended.
Re: She is a fraud... (Score:2)
She relied on underlines that provided testimony against her that led to her conviction.
The board of directors could easily have been duped, just as clients were - I'm not aware of her board being overly-staffed with medical/scientific experts, seemed more like it was staffed with 'celebrities' (either political or other) designed to appeal to potential investors.
As was noted previously, "Sunny" has been convicted of crimes.
I suppose the gov't could go after the underlings that carried out the fraud
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. But she did it while having ultimate responsibility. Being CEO is not a joke and not an ornamental position. They main overall responsibility is hers. Unless she was cleverly tricked, nobody else has that level of responsibility here.
She stole money from the rich (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I love your logic. She didn't do anything wrong because someone somewhere else did something wrong and they got off. OK.
He never said she didn't do anything wrong, he said she may have been more successful in avoiding responsibility if she picked different targets for her fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Found guilty in January and still lives at home like a non-criminal. Imagine what they would have done to her if she had sold a tiny amount of coke to an undercover cop, and not been a rich white woman.
Re: (Score:2)
Please explain just how these Senators plan on defrauding little old ladies?
Re: She stole money from the rich (Score:2)
I think the answer involves a lot of hand waving, a buttload of "you knows" and something he and his ilk refer to as "Mega MAGA" - in otherwords he has nothing to support his claim.
Guess she missed one of daddies lessons. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Guess she missed one of daddies lessons. (Score:5, Interesting)
Her father, Christian Rasmus Holmes IV, was a vice president at Enron, an energy company that later went bankrupt after an accounting fraud scandal. Her mother, Noel Anne (née Daoust), worked as a Congressional committee staffer.
No wonder she got access to all those powerful people. She's a member of the American ruling class.
That's probably why she's still not in prison.
People like "...former U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz" and "...William Perry (former U.S. Secretary of Defense), Henry Kissinger (former U.S. Secretary of State), Sam Nunn (former U.S. Senator), Bill Frist (former U.S. Senator, senate majority leader and heart-transplant surgeon), Gary Roughead (Admiral, USN, retired), Jim Mattis (General, USMC), Richard Kovacevich (former Wells Fargo Chairman and CEO) and Riley P. Bechtel (chairman of the board and former CEO at Bechtel Group)." must all be incredibly embarrassed.
When you think about it, the whole thing is quite funny.
Re: (Score:1)
No wonder she got access to all those powerful people. She's a member of the American ruling class.
That's probably why she's still not in prison.
It's hell when rich people are held accountable for their behavior.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Guess she missed one of daddies lessons. (Score:2)
You need to get over this - should she have been let go because of cashless bail, or should she be allowed to pay a cash bail? Is your argument that rich white people should be treated differently than poor people of color?
Re: (Score:2)
Because poor people don't get a year at home before they're sentenced.
You need to get over this
You need to get angry about it.
Re: Guess she missed one of daddies lessons. (Score:2)
Please describe cashless bail. Actual violent criminals are released on their own recognizance (no bond) every day, and they aren't just millionaires.
If a homeless person can assault sn elderly Asian woman and be released on their own recognizance, why can't a white collar criminal - oh, wait, she posted a $5M bond, didn't she?
Re: (Score:2)
That's probably why she's still not in prison.
She's still not in prison because the due process take time and only violent criminals should be imprisoned while awaiting the outcome of their trail. Even the Enron CEO took 5 and a half years from company collapse to being sentenced to prison.
Things aren't looking good for her, have some patience.
Good (Score:5, Funny)
I don't think someone who disappeared half the universe's population just by snapping their fingers should get off so easy.
Maybe a third baby will do the trick (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But if its a man who's psychotic they get praised, they get to be CEO of a different company ("sure he's failed at 3 places but he has all the experience and qualifications that this next unicorn startup needs!"), or maybe get elected president.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. The courts determined she is the criminal variant. Your point?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like Ken Lay?
Re: (Score:2)
If you manage to scam your way to $200B net worth, then nothing matters. The trick is getting there before anyone notices you're full of shit.
Good riddance (Score:1)
Have fun in jail bitch.
Re: (Score:1)
She's Guilty, As are Boardmembers (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
She is the chief officer of the company. The responsibility is hers. Board members are not only not officers, they aren't even employees.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you look at the Theranos Board of Directors, it was carefully picked to have people who would impress outsiders but had no special knowledge that would enable them to judge the company's science. Theranos was famous for getting big names from government on their board- at various times they had 2 former Secretaries of State and 1 former and 1 future Secretary of Defense- but they didn't bring any physicians or people with a background in the medical device industry until after they had been exposed. Th
Will Wallgreens Do Driveby if Released? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe doable at 30, she's going on 39 and getting over the hill. .
Re: (Score:1)
Totally a matter of taste. You're absolutely right. But heck, I'm going on 50. She looks darned fine to me. :)
Denied! (Score:2)