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

Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 112 posts

Re: Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

#31

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

nonrepeating wrote: post #18
andrewstuart wrote: post #10

Will she still be wealthy?

Her wealth was all on paper, that paper being equity in Theranos. By the time she was indicted her net worth was listed as zero.

She could probably sell her old turtlenecks on Ebay.

Perhaps she'll sell us a biography. But how can anyone believe any story coming from Elizabeth Holmes. She has some serious credibility problems.

The sentencing judge believed her when she said she bought a one way ticket to Mexico after she was convicted to attend a friend's wedding, not to flee from incarceration.

I believe the judge also referred to her as "brilliant", omitting the words "con artist".

Re: Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

#32

Post by xrayarx »

It is not a real prison. She will probably go to Bryan Minimum Security [1][2]. No fences. Dormitories. Visitations. Gym, etc. The fine is large, but symbolic. From the article, chance of full recovery is very low. No mention, if this would be converted to house arrest at some point.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Prison_Camp,_Bryan

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Holmes

Re: Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

#33

Post by samrus »

todd3834 wrote: post #30

10 years used to feel like a really long time to me. Now that I have two young kids the idea of missing out on 10 years of their life growing up is in the impossible to handle part of my brain. I feel bad for everyone effected and yes even her.

Well then they she shouldn't have decided to get pregnant as sson as the jury decided to convene.

Obviously it sucks for the kids. But they're rich. They'll have good foster care. And she doesn't care that she can't see them, she knee that was a risk when she had them, she took that gamble to try to stay out of prison.

This is psychopath we are talking about. And letting her off the hook because she has kids is going to encourage every other psychopath to do the same. That'll create more orphans in the long term.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

#34

Post by azernik »

rkagerer wrote: post #25
nonrepeating wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Her wealth was all on paper, that paper being equity in Theranos. By the time she was indicted her net worth was listed as zero.

In that case will this restitution likely never be paid?

Some might, if they go after her new husband's rather substantial property.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

#35

Post by chopete3 »

taneq wrote: post #20
chopete3 wrote: post #19

>> Charges for which Holmes was convicted in January. These included three counts of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Naive question: Why do they call this wire fraud? Where is the wire in this fraud?

Probably to telegraph the fact that it’s not using actual physical paper documents?

There is an appropriate name like Investment Fraud. Just wondering why don't use it and lump everything into under wire fraud which makes it seem a petty crime.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

#37

Post by fastball »

djur wrote: post #24
chopete3 wrote: post #19

>> Charges for which Holmes was convicted in January. These included three counts of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Naive question: Why do they call this wire fraud? Where is the wire in this fraud?

As opposed to mail fraud -- basically any kind of fraud committed via electronic communication. At the time they would have been thinking of telegrams and phones, but the statute covers fraudulent materials "transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication", so that covers the Internet as well.

If you commit all your fraud via Starlink, could you make the argument that you didn't do it over wire?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

#39

Post by fastball »

telltruth wrote: post #15
petesergeant wrote: post #2

Does anyone have a clear and simple answer on why she got two years less than Sunny Balwani?

Balwani's story is quite amazing. The dude won startup lottery and made enough money that he wouldn't have to worry rest of the life. He had a mansions, sports cars and lived his life happily. One day this young women walks in his life and wants help with her startup. The dude throws away everything to make her startup success, burns midnight oil and torches ethics. He is much older and thinks he is in love. Only lat…

Definitely don't think it is clear cut that he was the one being used.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes is going to prison – with a $500M bill

#40

Post by batmaniam »

dumbfoundded wrote: post #3
petesergeant wrote: post #2

Does anyone have a clear and simple answer on why she got two years less than Sunny Balwani?

Best analysis I've seen: "Balwani might have been perceived as someone “a little bit older and wiser” who should’ve known better." https://qz.com/theranos-sunny-balwani-jail-time-elizabeth-ho...

If the court system can try kids as adults for their heinous crimes, then the "should've known better" reasoning doesn't stand up. Plus she went to fancy schools, and was highly educated. She already "knew" better than most people living in the US.

They both should have gotten longer jail sentences, their convictions should have been about the people she harmed with her machines. Instead it was all about how she and Balwani mislead/ripped off their investors (who didn't even do their own work in due diligence).

Now Balwani is serving at a Club-Fed prison. The $452 million restitution she's been slapped with? Just for investors, it seems. Can anyone find an article that states actual people being victims? Nearly all news reports say the restitution is for "victims", but then the victims are just Safeway, Rupert Murdoch, Walgreens... etc.

There is no justice here. Not in the ruling, not in the sentencing, not even for real people. "Being wiser" or "older" is just a BS made-up reasoning. Let's at least not sugar coat why she got less of a ruling than Balwani. It's enough of an insult to those who were actually affected to have seen how this all played out.

Post reply on HN