Elizabeth Holmes: guilty

[budwom]

Yup, she had nothing, NOTHING! If only she had had at least something, ANYTHING, an article of clothing, a towel or...I know a head cushion...yeah, yeah what do you call em...uh a PILLOW! She could've called it HER Pillow, or Our Pillow our YOUR Pillow...whatever work out the adjective later.

I would've paid real money to anyone on the jury to have yelled out "At least Mike Lindell has a product!"

That's largely what differentiated her from the normal crowd of exaggerators and fibbers*...the only thing she ever came up with was the idea (and a good one) that it would be great if one drop of blood could be tested for dozens of different things...but the technology never existed.

* plus she was a psychopath.

[aimo]

That's largely what differentiated her from the normal crowd of exaggerators and fibbers*...the only thing she ever came up with was the idea (and a good one) that it would be great if one drop of blood could be tested for dozens of different things...but the technology never existed.

* plus she was a psychopath.

See, this is what blew me away when I read the book. I have worked in health research or research-related jobs my entire adult life. The idea that 100+ tests could be run from one drop of blood is like sci-fi talk. I know that SOMEDAY it could happen, but our technology is WAY away from this right now. Some of the knowledgeable folks in the book felt the same way and simply did not believe her. Others - KNOWLEDGEABLE people - were so fascinated by her that they believed her. I was shocked at how gullible some of these very intelligent people were. Only after the repeated issues and excuses did some of them finally see that she was a fraud.

She definitely has the knack for snowing people, you have to give her credit for that. But, yeah, psychopath.

[Indoor66]

See, this is what blew me away when I read the book. I have worked in health research or research-related jobs my entire adult life. The idea that 100+ tests could be run from one drop of blood is like sci-fi talk. I know that SOMEDAY it could happen, but our technology is WAY away from this right now. Some of the knowledgeable folks in the book felt the same way and simply did not believe her. Others - KNOWLEDGEABLE people - were so fascinated by her that they believed her. I was shocked at how gullible some of these very intelligent people were. Only after the repeated issues and excuses did some of them finally see that she was a fraud.

She definitely has the knack for snowing people, you have to give her credit for that. But, yeah, psychopath.

As does every good con man or grifter.

[bundabergdevil]

She definitely has the knack for snowing people, you have to give her credit for that. But, yeah, psychopath.

A preternatural knack from a young age. She took some of the supposedly smartest, most successful and savviest people on the planet for nearly a billion.

Her and Maddoff just goes to show every one, no matter how educated and worldly, is susceptible to snake oil.

That said, I don’t have a lot of empathy for the investors.

[Tooold]

See, this is what blew me away when I read the book. I have worked in health research or research-related jobs my entire adult life. The idea that 100+ tests could be run from one drop of blood is like sci-fi talk. I know that SOMEDAY it could happen, but our technology is WAY away from this right now. Some of the knowledgeable folks in the book felt the same way and simply did not believe her. Others - KNOWLEDGEABLE people - were so fascinated by her that they believed her. I was shocked at how gullible some of these very intelligent people were. Only after the repeated issues and excuses did some of them finally see that she was a fraud.

She definitely has the knack for snowing people, you have to give her credit for that. But, yeah, psychopath.

I had the same reaction when I read the book. IIRC, during her first semester she spoke to the department head of the appropriate graduate level department about her “idea” (not sure which department…chemistry? Microbiology? but the professor was an expert on things like blood chemistry). That professor TOLD her that the technology did not exist yet…that this was a pipe dream without a path to the solution (my words, not the professor’s). Yet Elizabeth, with all her hubris (or narcissism?) somehow believed that she could do this…that if she just dropped out of Stanford (following the paths of other genius entrepreneurs) she had all she needed to get this accomplished. Why put any effort into studying blood chemistry first….

[acdevil]

A preternatural knack from a young age. She took some of the supposedly smartest, most successful and savviest people on the planet for nearly a billion.

Her and Maddoff just goes to show every one, no matter how educated and worldly, is susceptible to snake oil.

That said, I don’t have a lot of empathy for the investors.

For me, NFTs and crypto have shades of this as well. But that’s another thread.

[aimo]

A preternatural knack from a young age. She took some of the supposedly smartest, most successful and savviest people on the planet for nearly a billion.

Her and Maddoff just goes to show every one, no matter how educated and worldly, is susceptible to snake oil.

That said, I don’t have a lot of empathy for the investors.

For me, NFTs and crypto have shades of this as well. But that’s another thread.

GREED. It brushes all logic away.

[budwom]

See, this is what blew me away when I read the book. I have worked in health research or research-related jobs my entire adult life. The idea that 100+ tests could be run from one drop of blood is like sci-fi talk. I know that SOMEDAY it could happen, but our technology is WAY away from this right now. Some of the knowledgeable folks in the book felt the same way and simply did not believe her. Others - KNOWLEDGEABLE people - were so fascinated by her that they believed her. I was shocked at how gullible some of these very intelligent people were. Only after the repeated issues and excuses did some of them finally see that she was a fraud.

She definitely has the knack for snowing people, you have to give her credit for that. But, yeah, psychopath.

Maybe she watched too much Star Trek and envied what Bones could do.

[Phredd3]

Maybe she watched too much Star Trek and envied what Bones could do.

"The doctor gave me a pill and I grew a new kidney!"

[Ggallagher]

"The doctor gave me a pill and I grew a new kidney!"

Well PT Barnum (or whoever said it originally) says, "Hi Sucker".

I have read the book, and Elizabeth was stunningly great at offense and defense.

Her ability to seduce the investors was remarkable and probably does say something about the investors. And then defensively, the lies, legal threats, and outright razzle-dazzle flimflam trickery worked to keep the charade under control within the company.

They should lock her up for a long, long time.

[budwom]

Well PT Barnum (or whoever said it originally) says, "Hi Sucker".

I have read the book, and Elizabeth was stunningly great at offense and defense.

Her ability to seduce the investors was remarkable and probably does say something about the investors. And then defensively, the lies, legal threats, and outright razzle-dazzle flimflam trickery worked to keep the charade under control within the company.

They should lock her up for a long, long time.

a key guy seemed to be her mentor at Stanford...his word was gold, and when he endorsed her people bought in like crazy (literally).

[luvdahops]

I, too, wish she had been found guilty of defrauding patients (and from what I read in the book, I believe that patients were harmed when they received inaccurate results). I heard some discussion that the prosecution simply didn’t provide enough evidence to convict on defrauding patients, which boggles my mind in a trial that was so long and involved so many witnesses. The facts were complicated…could it have been a case of the prosecutors getting too deep in the weeds for the jury to understand, or did they shortchange that part of their case?

I did not follow the case details that closely, but from my knowledge of the Healthcare sector, the chain of liability for patient harm is more complicated than for investors. In that there are physicians and other healthcare professionals who ordered Theranos tests and made care recommendations based on results, presumably according to their professional judgment, as well as corporate entities like Walgreen's that endorsed use of the "technology". And Theranos as a legal entity is more likely to be next in line than Holmes personally, although that line is a blurry one certainly.

One other issue that the Theranos case shines light on, and not in a favorable way, is the FDA's limited oversight of so-called "lab-developed tests".

[duke74]

Interesting perspective on the jury deliberations and decisions rationale from a juror. From the FT. (Might be paywalled)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jury-in..._copyURL_share

[budwom]

Interesting perspective on the jury deliberations and decisions rationale from a juror. From the FT. (Might be paywalled)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jury-in..._copyURL_share

good read. To me, the obvious smoking gun is showing investors the Theranos testing device, then running the actual tests on someone else's machines...if that isn't fraud, I can't imagine what is.

I'm still not buying the assertion that her co-star in the firm abused her into dishonesty...they both had plenty of dishonesty to go around.

[duke74]

good read. To me, the obvious smoking gun is showing investors the Theranos testing device, then running the actual tests on someone else's machines...if that isn't fraud, I can't imagine what is.

I'm still not buying the assertion that her co-star in the firm abused her into dishonesty...they both had plenty of dishonesty to go around.

Jury didn't buy it either. Believed there was abuse, but not the cause/reason for her fraud.

BTW, I mistyped. Was from the WSJ, not FT.

[budwom]

[/I][/B]

Jury didn't buy it either. Believed there was abuse, but not the cause/reason for her fraud.

BTW, I mistyped. Was from the WSJ, not FT.

right..it's just difficult to believe the abuse angle having read the book...

[duke79]

right..it's just difficult to believe the abuse angle having read the book...

Yea, in the legal world, sometimes called the "Hail Mary" defense....when you're client is obviously and blatantly guilty of the crime(s) for which they are charged and you have to come up with some "theory" that MIGHT convince the jury to find reasonable doubt. Rarely works but what other choice do the defense lawyers have?

[Tooold]

good read. To me, the obvious smoking gun is showing investors the Theranos testing device, then running the actual tests on someone else's machines...if that isn't fraud, I can't imagine what is.

I'm still not buying the assertion that her co-star in the firm abused her into dishonesty...they both had plenty of dishonesty to go around.

The description in the book of the testing device scam was pretty clear to me. “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”.

As far as the abuse…I am pretty that she was already well into scam mode before the relationship with Sunny began. I don’t know if I believe that there was abuse or not…it just seems like too convenient of an excuse. She was/is a very strong woman who seemed to be in charge of every aspect of her life…not that a strong woman cannot be abused, but I have a hard time buying it in this case, knowing what she was like before she even met him. Everything in her life seemed to be well-planned (including the pregnancy after being charged…).

[Indoor66]

That defense ranks up with the one about the dog eating the homework thingy.

[budwom]

The description in the book of the testing device scam was pretty clear to me. “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”.

As far as the abuse…I am pretty that she was already well into scam mode before the relationship with Sunny began. I don’t know if I believe that there was abuse or not…it just seems like too convenient of an excuse. She was/is a very strong woman who seemed to be in charge of every aspect of her life…not that a strong woman cannot be abused, but I have a hard time buying it in this case, knowing what she was like before she even met him. Everything in her life seemed to be well-planned (including the pregnancy after being charged…).

my take as well. The woman was very strong and very confident and in control of everything. Good thing Harvey Weinstein is behind bars, because Holmes could've blamed him for abuse (vis a vis the grasping at straws defense).