Boy what a mess this trial turned out to be. Holmes is found guilty of four charges, not guilty on four charges, and no verdict on three charges. The guilty charges relate to conspiracy to defraud investors and wire fraud. This has long slog of appeal and other nonsense written all over it.

It's hard not to be cynical about this case. Other companies in the medical industry have pushed some pretty dark sales strategies (hello oxycontin!), but are still around. Theranos ran up a valuation of $9B on a preposterous product case that was scientifically impossible, and still is. Holmes is guilty, but she isn't the worst fraudster out there - it almost feels like Theranos went down this hard because some big name investors failed to do basic homework. Still, very rare for any executive of anything to get rung up on federal charges for fraud.

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

It's comical l that I also got the feeling CNN was outright pissed that this woman was convicted as you seem to be. Tread title doesn't make any sense as well. She was found guilty (rightly so) and will do some serious time. Never really paid her any mind but watched an interview she did with CNBC when the public and others first started to doubt her. Her answers were total dodges and she really didn't do anything but talk about everything but the charges against her. I also got the impression her ex had serious mind control over this in the beginning. The MSM wanter her to be the next Steve Jobs but wasn't meant to be. Bye Felicia.

NIKV69 wrote:

It's comical l that I also got the feeling CNN was outright pissed that this woman was convicted as you seem to be. Tread title doesn't make any sense as well. She was found guilty (rightly so) and will do some serious time. Never really paid her any mind but watched an interview she did with CNBC when the public and others first started to doubt her. Her answers were total dodges and she really didn't do anything but talk about everything but the charges against her. I also got the impression her ex had serious mind control over this in the beginning. The MSM wanter her to be the next Steve Jobs but wasn't meant to be. Bye Felicia.

Where in the post did I indicate I am pissed she was convicted? I said her company's claims were a joke and the verdicts were a mess - I think all 11 should have returned guilty. I also said more medical executives need to be brought up on fraud like this because she isn't the only one, and not the worst of the lot.

The thread title is fine - the verdicts *are* a mess.

Newark727 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

The MSM wanter her to be the next Steve Jobs but wasn't meant to be. Bye Felicia.

She wanted to be the next Steve Jobs, down to purposefully imitating his mannerisms. She honestly sounds like a pretty strange person, but I guess this wouldn't have happened if she was all there.

But if you're in the business of shoveling $eleventy-zillion at every "disruptive" PowerPoint presentation, you're going to pick some duds along with the winners.

There's a disruptive business model, and then there's pseudoscientific nonsense like claiming a single test can delineate between hundreds of types of cells and biochemical markers in blood. Nuts.

Aaron747 wrote:

I think all 11 should have returned guilty.

The thread title is fine - the verdicts *are* a mess.

I am pretty sure this is a great verdict this jury was having trouble coming to any consensus so the 4 convictions is fine with me.

NIKV69 wrote:

It's comical l that I also got the feeling CNN was outright pissed that this woman was convicted as you seem to be. Tread title doesn't make any sense as well. She was found guilty (rightly so) and will do some serious time. Never really paid her any mind but watched an interview she did with CNBC when the public and others first started to doubt her. Her answers were total dodges and she really didn't do anything but talk about everything but the charges against her. I also got the impression her ex had serious mind control over this in the beginning. The MSM wanter her to be the next Steve Jobs but wasn't meant to be. Bye Felicia.

Couldn’t agree more. It’s comical to rewind the clock a few years and witness everyone gushing over the despicable woman. Her fake voice should have been the first red flag. How she fooled anyone is a mystery to me.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/business-le ... orter-says

And Fox has suddenly found a way to tie this to Biden. This is on the level of "look we have a picture of Trump with Kim, he must support the North Korean Regime"

CitizenJustin wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

It's comical l that I also got the feeling CNN was outright pissed that this woman was convicted as you seem to be. Tread title doesn't make any sense as well. She was found guilty (rightly so) and will do some serious time. Never really paid her any mind but watched an interview she did with CNBC when the public and others first started to doubt her. Her answers were total dodges and she really didn't do anything but talk about everything but the charges against her. I also got the impression her ex had serious mind control over this in the beginning. The MSM wanter her to be the next Steve Jobs but wasn't meant to be. Bye Felicia.

Couldn’t agree more. It’s comical to rewind the clock a few years and witness everyone gushing over the despicable woman. Her fake voice should have been the first red flag. How she fooled anyone is a mystery to me.

Easy: 70-something investors were wowed by tall blonde woman...or something like that. But anyone who remembers Bio 101 should have realized what Theranos claimed they could do was 100% BS. I'm just glad their whistleblowers were vindicated.

I think what makes me laugh is that she was 'Wonderwoman'. Then it goes pearshaped, and suddenly it is all the fault of her ex.

I find it interesting that the last three national coverage trials all had women defendants. Holmes, Maxwell and Potter. The first two tried some degree of the "poor woman dominated by a man" defense. Thank goodness it didn't work.

Ms. Holmes was like other scam artists believed in their own bullstuff, knew she was running a scam to make a lot of money on and boost her ego. Far too many are looking for the next investment to make a fast buck thing, to purchase early, have the stock go up, dump it at the 'right time', no matter if it eventually fails. That this was led by a woman added to the desire to invest as so few women involved with such potential high return investments. If it seems to be too good to be true, then it likely is. For sure her one drop blood tests were not physically possible at this time.
While she didn't get convicted on all the charges, the jury saw weaknesses in the evidence for some of them, was possible prosecution overkill or duplication of charges, that others they did convict her on met the legal standard to do so. She will likely face a 10 year sentence in an 'easy' woman's Federal prison. The sad part is she got caught while 1000's other scammers get away with their crimes due to difficulty to get them or have enough connections to get away with them.

CitizenJustin wrote:

How she fooled anyone is a mystery to me.

What's amazing is that people keep falling for much more obvious scams than this.

Theranos happened right around that time when it seemed people couldn't invest enough of their money into Silicon Valley tech ventures. It was like a massive casino where no one wanted to miss out on the next unicorn jackpot, and tech start ups could seemingly do no wrong in the eyes of people who, for most, didn't even understand what product the companies they invested in was developing... It just didn't matter. All they needed were black turtlenecks and fancy presentations on giant screens.

We still see the same happening today in slightly different fields. Crypto is currently awash with scammers, all pushing their countless shitcoins to a naive and clueless audience through the most air brained Tik Tok 'influencer' they can find to perform textbook pump and dumps. What's even nastier in this case is that since this is a completely unregulated field, they fear noting from the law. But since all the FOMO frenzy has moved to the crypto field now, everyone is out looking to throw their cash at the first hint that they may have found the next Doge coin. Nevermind that none of them seem to understand anything about the technology, in fact that's one of the keys to a successful scam.

And then then there's Kisckstarter...

The World is awash with liquidity and in no shortage of gullible people. The World will also never be short of those who seek to part fools from their money.

It's not that the more mainstream tech sector has cleaned up either. If anyone believes that Tesla is worth as much as the World's next 10 auto manufacturers combined, while having only captured less than 2% of the global auto market and seeing its revenue plateau for the last couple of years, I have bad news.

A pretty snake oil salesman who didn't even lace the oil with curative herbs.

Francoflier wrote:

CitizenJustin wrote:

How she fooled anyone is a mystery to me.

What's amazing is that people keep falling for much more obvious scams than this.
The World is awash with liquidity and in no shortage of gullible people. The World will also never be short of those who seek to part fools from their money.

The world is full of fools who breed more fools.

luckyone wrote:

The world is full of fools who breed more fools.

And now it seems all these fools are all buying NFTs...

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree, her Father was an Eron VP, (y'know, the 'respectable, non silicon Valley, more deeply politically embedded mass scammers).
And the legal narco cartels are still operating right?

I agree that she should have been found guilty on all counts, consider the above, the history, the culture, even as far back as gold rushes, or the mass financial frauds, then really consider it lucky she went to trial at all, or was not cleared of all charges.

johns624 wrote:

I find it interesting that the last three national coverage trials all had women defendants. Holmes, Maxwell and Potter. The first two tried some degree of the "poor woman dominated by a man" defense. Thank goodness it didn't work.

I really appreciate the way Potter conducted herself in the trail. She showed remorse and from what I understood, did not play victim. Because of this, her sentencing will likely be way lighter, and her actual time spent behind bars will probably be around 4 or so years, if not just house arrest.

CitizenJustin wrote:

Couldn’t agree more. It’s comical to rewind the clock a few years and witness everyone gushing over the despicable woman. Her fake voice should have been the first red flag. How she fooled anyone is a mystery to me.

The voice thing was un-nerving and a giveaway for sure.

bennett123 wrote:

I think what makes me laugh is that she was 'Wonderwoman'. Then it goes pearshaped, and suddenly it is all the fault of her ex.

I wouldn't say it all the fault of her ex but he did have some sort of mind control over her. The more I listen to her in videos the more I see she wasn't a strong secure person but it takes two to tango and she made her bed and will lie in it now.

NIKV69 wrote:

CitizenJustin wrote:

Couldn’t agree more. It’s comical to rewind the clock a few years and witness everyone gushing over the despicable woman. Her fake voice should have been the first red flag. How she fooled anyone is a mystery to me.

The voice thing was un-nerving and a giveaway for sure.

bennett123 wrote:

I think what makes me laugh is that she was 'Wonderwoman'. Then it goes pearshaped, and suddenly it is all the fault of her ex.

I wouldn't say it all the fault of her ex but he did have some sort of mind control over her. The more I listen to her in videos the more I see she wasn't a strong secure person but it takes two to tango and she made her bed and will lie in it now.

And her tendency to wear black turtlenecks like Steve Jobs? Come on! Why didn’t anyone pick up on this? I think people were so desperate to have a female Steve that they overlooked all the glaring red flags. A lot of people seem to think she’s attractive so this probably helped as well.

CitizenJustin wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

CitizenJustin wrote:

Couldn’t agree more. It’s comical to rewind the clock a few years and witness everyone gushing over the despicable woman. Her fake voice should have been the first red flag. How she fooled anyone is a mystery to me.

The voice thing was un-nerving and a giveaway for sure.

bennett123 wrote:

I think what makes me laugh is that she was 'Wonderwoman'. Then it goes pearshaped, and suddenly it is all the fault of her ex.

I wouldn't say it all the fault of her ex but he did have some sort of mind control over her. The more I listen to her in videos the more I see she wasn't a strong secure person but it takes two to tango and she made her bed and will lie in it now.

And her tendency to wear black turtlenecks like Steve Jobs? Come on! Why didn’t anyone pick up on this? I think people were so desperate to have a female Steve that they overlooked all the glaring red flags. A lot of people seem to think she’s attractive so this probably helped as well.

I have been watching many of her vids and doing much research and this whole story is so scary. I remember a similar Fraud when John Spanos actually took ownership of the Islanders without having the money he told everyone he did. In the documentary a great line was everybody thought he was rich because he was perceived to the rich. It's a must watch as one of the most famous sports frauds.

As for Holmes I think many things are at play here. First most of this was media driven. In the beginning they fawned over her, Norah O'Donnell did an interview that was a total lovefest. I would be willing to bet she is a Democrat so that helped, she is attractive and she was definitely playing a role, hence the turtlenecks and voice. I think many of this was orchestrated. I mean she knew that the technology was not there and not forthcoming so they had a huge problem on their hands with how to do all that testing in time. Once that journalist figured it out they were screwed and she knew her best excuse was to blame her boyfriend. Much like with John Spanos banks and investers did very little due diligence after they asked for money to support their venture. Her interview with CNBC when they first were getting some real scrutiny was very telling. She used every media catch phrase and mostly didn't answer a single question. Blaming people that didn't exist etc. It should be a cautionary tale. Especially when people's health is involved. Holmes and her ex boyfriend hopefully do at least 3-5 years in jail so they can think about it.

NIKV69 wrote:

CitizenJustin wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

The voice thing was un-nerving and a giveaway for sure.



I wouldn't say it all the fault of her ex but he did have some sort of mind control over her. The more I listen to her in videos the more I see she wasn't a strong secure person but it takes two to tango and she made her bed and will lie in it now.

And her tendency to wear black turtlenecks like Steve Jobs? Come on! Why didn’t anyone pick up on this? I think people were so desperate to have a female Steve that they overlooked all the glaring red flags. A lot of people seem to think she’s attractive so this probably helped as well.

I have been watching many of her vids and doing much research and this whole story is so scary. I remember a similar Fraud when John Spanos actually took ownership of the Islanders without having the money he told everyone he did. In the documentary a great line was everybody thought he was rich because he was perceived to the rich. It's a must watch as one of the most famous sports frauds.

As for Holmes I think many things are at play here. First most of this was media driven. In the beginning they fawned over her, Norah O'Donnell did an interview that was a total lovefest. I would be willing to bet she is a Democrat so that helped, she is attractive and she was definitely playing a role, hence the turtlenecks and voice. I think many of this was orchestrated. I mean she knew that the technology was not there and not forthcoming so they had a huge problem on their hands with how to do all that testing in time. Once that journalist figured it out they were screwed and she knew her best excuse was to blame her boyfriend. Much like with John Spanos banks and investers did very little due diligence after they asked for money to support their venture. Her interview with CNBC when they first were getting some real scrutiny was very telling. She used every media catch phrase and mostly didn't answer a single question. Blaming people that didn't exist etc. It should be a cautionary tale. Especially when people's health is involved. Holmes and her ex boyfriend hopefully do at least 3-5 years in jail so they can think about it.

It’s still baffling how she fooled so many of these supposedly intelligent people and how can a company be valued at 9 billion with nothing to show? One of the worst interviews was with Bill Clinton. The whole thing was cringeworthy and he was so over the top in his praise of this fraud. You know I’m liberal but I’m being honest and the Clinton interview was hard to watch. He was struggling to keep the creepy old man under control and managed poorly. I wonder if a male in her position would have experienced the same meteoric rise? Are people more likely to accept complete BS when it comes from a pretty blonde? I think this case potentially exposes many of our biases. I also noticed that the interviewers never really asked her hard hitting questions and criticism was nonexistent. I understand though because accusations of sexism can be a career ender, so I don’t blame many for treading carefully.

I thought they were looking at some serious time? You think 3-5 is all? It will be interesting to see if she’s given a second chance or destined to remain a pariah.

CitizenJustin wrote:

It’s still baffling how she fooled so many of these supposedly intelligent people and how can a company be valued at 9 billion with nothing to show?

I think John Spanos was worse he actually took legal ownership of a Major sports franchise with nothing. Don't forget how CNBC and the market works, they sell hopes and dreams and have analysts that tell you if what she is claiming about her testing is true what it is worth when in reality it's worth zero. Like that painting on Gordon Gekko's wall. Remember what he said

It's like magic, this painting here I bought it 10 years ago for $60,000 I could sell it today for $600,000 the illusion has become real and the more real it becomes the more desperate they want it. Capitalism at it's finest.

The best minds in business speculated that her company was worth 9 Billion without her producing one unit that did what it was supposed to do. It's scary.

CitizenJustin wrote:

One of the worst interviews was with Bill Clinton. The whole thing was cringeworthy and he was so over the top in his praise of this fraud. You know I’m liberal but I’m being honest and the Clinton interview was hard to watch. He was struggling to keep the creepy old man under control and managed poorly. I wonder if a male in her position would have experienced the same meteoric rise? Are people more likely to accept complete BS when it comes from a pretty blonde? I think this case potentially exposes many of our biases. I also noticed that the interviewers never really asked her hard hitting questions and criticism was nonexistent. I understand though because accusations of sexism can be a career ender, so I don’t blame many for treading carefully.

Yea I watched that Clinton interview video it was as hard to watch as the Norah O'Donnell one. Maybe they saw the next George Soros but it was tough to watch nobody exercise one bit of journalistic integrity and get some evidence her company was doing what they said they were doing.

CitizenJustin wrote:

I thought they were looking at some serious time? You think 3-5 is all? It will be interesting to see if she’s given a second chance or destined to remain a pariah.

She is going to serve half of what she is sentenced to if that. With it being a white collar crime and all I bet she will be sentenced to much more than 3 to 5 but I don't see her being in jail for more than 4 years. Maybe she has a deal to flip on her ex boyfriend as well. You know these people they always buy their way out somehow.

Francoflier wrote:

luckyone wrote:

The world is full of fools who breed more fools.

And now it seems all these fools are all buying NFTs...

I think there are still plenty of people buying Tesla stock.

Having fully autonomous driving and delivering tens of thousands of Tesla Trucks since both became available three years ago really makes those worth it.

best regards
Thomas

NIKV69 wrote:

CitizenJustin wrote:

It’s still baffling how she fooled so many of these supposedly intelligent people and how can a company be valued at 9 billion with nothing to show?

I think John Spanos was worse he actually took legal ownership of a Major sports franchise with nothing. Don't forget how CNBC and the market works, they sell hopes and dreams and have analysts that tell you if what she is claiming about her testing is true what it is worth when in reality it's worth zero. Like that painting on Gordon Gekko's wall. Remember what he said

It's like magic, this painting here I bought it 10 years ago for $60,000 I could sell it today for $600,000 the illusion has become real and the more real it becomes the more desperate they want it. Capitalism at it's finest.

The best minds in business speculated that her company was worth 9 Billion without her producing one unit that did what it was supposed to do. It's scary.

CitizenJustin wrote:

One of the worst interviews was with Bill Clinton. The whole thing was cringeworthy and he was so over the top in his praise of this fraud. You know I’m liberal but I’m being honest and the Clinton interview was hard to watch. He was struggling to keep the creepy old man under control and managed poorly. I wonder if a male in her position would have experienced the same meteoric rise? Are people more likely to accept complete BS when it comes from a pretty blonde? I think this case potentially exposes many of our biases. I also noticed that the interviewers never really asked her hard hitting questions and criticism was nonexistent. I understand though because accusations of sexism can be a career ender, so I don’t blame many for treading carefully.

Yea I watched that Clinton interview video it was as hard to watch as the Norah O'Donnell one. Maybe they saw the next George Soros but it was tough to watch nobody exercise one bit of journalistic integrity and get some evidence her company was doing what they said they were doing.

CitizenJustin wrote:

I thought they were looking at some serious time? You think 3-5 is all? It will be interesting to see if she’s given a second chance or destined to remain a pariah.

She is going to serve half of what she is sentenced to if that. With it being a white collar crime and all I bet she will be sentenced to much more than 3 to 5 but I don't see her being in jail for more than 4 years. Maybe she has a deal to flip on her ex boyfriend as well. You know these people they always buy their way out somehow.

You’ve clearly followed the case and I appreciate the info. I was really hoping that the judge would throw the book at her. I suppose her being found guilty is a win all by itself. I’m really tired of the lack of accountability. We live in a world where a teenager working a summer job at McDonald’s is held to a higher standard than the leaders who’re supposed to set the example.

CitizenJustin wrote:

You’ve clearly followed the case and I appreciate the info. I was really hoping that the judge would throw the book at her. I suppose her being found guilty is a win all by itself. I’m really tired of the lack of accountability. We live in a world where a teenager working a summer job at McDonald’s is held to a higher standard than the leaders who’re supposed to set the example.

I actually never really paid any mind to her while it was going on but since the verdict I have crammed and watched so many vids. I kind of feel sorry for her, she is no Meg Whitman that is for sure and IMO very insecure and weak.

Even if the judge throws the book at her I feel she will serve much less. This should be cautionary tale, we can only hope.

stl07 wrote:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/business-leaders/bidens-praise-played-key-role-in-legitimizing-theranos-elizabeth-holmes-reporter-says

And Fox has suddenly found a way to tie this to Biden. This is on the level of "look we have a picture of Trump with Kim, he must support the North Korean Regime"

Biden and Clinton never invested in Theranos. It’s kinda common for a politician to visit a company, say “Wow this is cool stuff you’re doing!” It relies on the expectation that you’re not going to lie outright in public.

The fun bit is the Devos family, of which former education secretary Betsy Devos is a member invested, $100,000,000 in Theranos.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59071205

There were other links to the Trump administration and prominent former military officials.