Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#661

Post by dragonwriter »

Nasrudith wrote: post #618
starfallg wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, negligence would be that something else. Theranos had a duty of care to the patients and they very blatantly breached that duty. Fraud deals with purely financial loss, while negligence deals with harm which is much wider in scope.

Yeah negligence is a better fit. Their process sucked unacceptably and they knew it but they didn't set out to lie with test results or never performed them. I think they might have contracted out tests to real labs which could be fraud but that would be both harder to link to Holmes and potentially defensible. Imagine an alternate world with a Nega-Theranos which actually had machines which worked but were say five…

> Their process sucked unacceptably and they knew it but they didn't set out to lie with test results

They lied about what test they were doing, and people paid them based on that lie. While the jury here may be correct that that wasn't federal wire fraud by Holmes personally, it absolutely was a fraud by Theranos.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#662

Post by bambax »

seehafer wrote: post #187
tptacek wrote: post #78

Time to kibitz on the likely sentence! You can get the federal sentencing guidelines here: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines-manu... They're long and mostly not relevant except for the sections pertaining to Holmes conduct. Here's the indictment: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/page/file/1135066/download Holmes was found guilty of one 18 USC 1349 charge, and 3 18 USC 1343 charges; the 1343's s…

From former AUSA, and current white-collar defense attorney Ken White: "She faces a max of 65 years (3x20 + 1x5). And it's not at all clear she'll do less than 20." Apparently the sentences will not necessarily be served concurrently. https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478170494130003976?s=20

I hate Holmes as much as anyone [0], but life in prison (65 years when you're 37 = out when you're 102) sounds unreasonably harsh.

She's not convicted of actually, physically harming anyone, esp. patients (which doesn't mean she didn't -- but she wasn't found guilty of that); she's convicted of lying to investors.

That's obviously bad, and should carry some form of punishment. Maybe 5 years? But life?? That's insane.

[0] I read John Carreyrou's book when it came out.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#663

Post by jollybean »

lr4444lr wrote: post #412
manquer wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it is unusual for the med tech industry, isnt it what startups do all the time ? it is not that surprising to me . It is not pure SaaS companies either, in the EV/self-driving space we have outright frauds like Nikola rolled a truck downhill to make the video and were public at $8 Billion. Others like Rivian/ tuSimple are definitely are not going to meet the projections in sales and plans they have published. T…

The equivalent in SaaS would be something like saying you had a single non-distributed non-sharded table RDBMS technology that could perform equivalent at 10 billion records on full ACID as well as Postgres could on 100K records. You have no such thing. No one knows how to make such a thing. It would require a breakthrough in software at Turing award level. You should get slapped with charges if you take investor mon…

The magnitude of the lie isn't hugely relevant, a lie is a lie.

Sales people lie all the time and make claims about features that don't exist, often because the company has other priorities not because they are 'impossible' - but again, that doesn't really matter either.

It's a tactic used by salespeople to get the company to rally around a feature or set of features.

It's very common.

You have to ask yourself how that is not prosecuted as being illegal.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#664

Post by s_dev »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #182
mertd wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe don't fake "medical devices" till you make it.

She was not found guilty on any charges of harming or swindling patients. This was about the wealthy investors. They will come after you whether you fake medical devices or bombs.

They were the only people not guaranteed an outcome -- investment is inherently risky. Medical procedures are not.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#665

Post by Hnrobert42 »

bambax wrote: post #662
seehafer wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From former AUSA, and current white-collar defense attorney Ken White: "She faces a max of 65 years (3x20 + 1x5). And it's not at all clear she'll do less than 20." Apparently the sentences will not necessarily be served concurrently. https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478170494130003976?s=20

I hate Holmes as much as anyone [0], but life in prison (65 years when you're 37 = out when you're 102) sounds unreasonably harsh. She's not convicted of actually, physically harming anyone, esp. patients (which doesn't mean she didn't -- but she wasn't found guilty of that); she's convicted of lying to investors. That's obviously bad, and should carry some form of punishment. Maybe 5 years? But life?? That's insane.…

5 years?! People can get that much for stealing a car or jewelry. She stole tens of millions! Not only that, she did it through fraud. It’s not like you can just build a higher fence. For the system to work, it must be free of fraud.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#666

Post by Hendrikto »

bambax wrote: post #662
seehafer wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From former AUSA, and current white-collar defense attorney Ken White: "She faces a max of 65 years (3x20 + 1x5). And it's not at all clear she'll do less than 20." Apparently the sentences will not necessarily be served concurrently. https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478170494130003976?s=20

I hate Holmes as much as anyone [0], but life in prison (65 years when you're 37 = out when you're 102) sounds unreasonably harsh. She's not convicted of actually, physically harming anyone, esp. patients (which doesn't mean she didn't -- but she wasn't found guilty of that); she's convicted of lying to investors. That's obviously bad, and should carry some form of punishment. Maybe 5 years? But life?? That's insane.…

> She's not convicted of actually, physically harming anyone

She should be though. People had unnecessary and invasive medical treatment as a direct result pf her fraud.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#667

Post by atlantic »

bambax wrote: post #662
seehafer wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From former AUSA, and current white-collar defense attorney Ken White: "She faces a max of 65 years (3x20 + 1x5). And it's not at all clear she'll do less than 20." Apparently the sentences will not necessarily be served concurrently. https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478170494130003976?s=20

I hate Holmes as much as anyone [0], but life in prison (65 years when you're 37 = out when you're 102) sounds unreasonably harsh. She's not convicted of actually, physically harming anyone, esp. patients (which doesn't mean she didn't -- but she wasn't found guilty of that); she's convicted of lying to investors. That's obviously bad, and should carry some form of punishment. Maybe 5 years? But life?? That's insane.…

Your argument is applicable to all white-collar crime. And it's emotionally-based, because she looks like one of us, not like a stereotypical thug. But in fact, she lied to take money from investors - theft on a grand scale - even if she wasn't wielding a sawn-off shotgun and wearing a ski mask. Edit: aside from that, I agree the potential sentence is very long, but that is characteristic of the US justice system, right across the board. In my country, the maximum sentence is 25 years, regardless of the crime.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#668

Post by bambax »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #665
bambax wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate Holmes as much as anyone [0], but life in prison (65 years when you're 37 = out when you're 102) sounds unreasonably harsh. She's not convicted of actually, physically harming anyone, esp. patients (which doesn't mean she didn't -- but she wasn't found guilty of that); she's convicted of lying to investors. That's obviously bad, and should carry some form of punishment. Maybe 5 years? But life?? That's insane.…

5 years?! People can get that much for stealing a car or jewelry. She stole tens of millions! Not only that, she did it through fraud. It’s not like you can just build a higher fence. For the system to work, it must be free of fraud.

Fraud is different from theft. Fraud is manipulating consent. Theft is taking by force what isn't yours. I don't know why everyone seems to be conflating the two everywhere in this thread.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#669

Post by Hendrikto »

mdoms wrote: post #340
metadat wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully she'll get more, SV could use a good example. Otherwise it signals that wantrepeneurs can keep doing it with minimal repercussions.

Ok I'm not American so perhaps my perspective is different... More than 10 years would be utterly barbaric. The 65 years mentioned in another comment chain would be well beyond the pale. I'm no fan of Holmes, but what good does it serve to lock up non violent criminals for decades?

Non-violent does not mean that she did not cause physical harm. People underwent invasive and unnecessary medical procedures as a direct result of Holmes‘ fraud.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#670

Post by Boritanian »

bambax wrote: post #662
seehafer wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From former AUSA, and current white-collar defense attorney Ken White: "She faces a max of 65 years (3x20 + 1x5). And it's not at all clear she'll do less than 20." Apparently the sentences will not necessarily be served concurrently. https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1478170494130003976?s=20

I hate Holmes as much as anyone [0], but life in prison (65 years when you're 37 = out when you're 102) sounds unreasonably harsh. She's not convicted of actually, physically harming anyone, esp. patients (which doesn't mean she didn't -- but she wasn't found guilty of that); she's convicted of lying to investors. That's obviously bad, and should carry some form of punishment. Maybe 5 years? But life?? That's insane.…

She effectively stole millions. That's multiple lifetimes worth of work for a lot of people.

If you assume average salary of 100k per year per person with 1/4th of time work per year. that's effectively 400k per year per person. He stole a hundred million which would be 250 years.

Post reply on HN