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

61–70 of 112 posts

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

#61

Post by quantified »

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…

Do fall in love. If you're rich enough, you can survive on half your wealth nicely, but in that case do take the prenup because you are a financial target.

Don't lose your ethics. He deserves quite a bit of his downfall.

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

#62

Post by alexdunmow »

fastball wrote: post #37
djur wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

There's definitely a wire somewhere in the mix. Probably more than one!

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

#63

Post by a_bonobo »

mnky9800n wrote: post #47
samrus wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

She likely had children because she thought it would make her more sympathetic. Unlikely given how she acts and treats all around her that the children are more than pawns in her game.

Imagine being her child; imagine growing up knowing that in all likelihood, you only exist because your mother wanted to stay out of prison.

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

#64

Post by fardo »

fastball wrote: post #37
djur wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You can try almost anything in a courtroom, whether something’s likely to work is wholly another matter. When in doubt, legal processes tend to try to defer to precedent and prior case law.

My guess is they would see a parallel between other also-not-really-telegraph-wire technologies on which others were convicted of wire fraud, and a Starlink connection.

This means it probably wouldn’t legally be treated as appreciably different from any other current physical or wireless connection.

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

#65

Post by archibaldJ »

klyrs wrote: post #44
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.

I have the capacity to feel really bad for her kids. I couldn't care less about the rich investors money she squandered, but as a mother I'm spitting furious that she would bring two children into this world, knowing that she was guilty for the fraud that she stood accused of. She's begged the courts for leniency on behalf of her children, and I really want to believe that she didn't have children for that sole purpo…

or perhaps not every human decision /behavior should be interpreted with too much intentions. Most likely she actually believed in how it could have worked out.

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

#66

Post by ak_111 »

mathieuh wrote: post #50
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.

I haven't followed this closely but frankly I feel similarly. I think only people who are violent and dangerous to other people should be locked up, and even then only until they are no longer dangerous. If things can be organised so she is no longer capable of defrauding people (banned from holding certain positions in companies etc.) I don't see why she should be locked up. I'm sure I would feel differently if I ha…

I sympathise with this view in general and with her situation having kids she won't be able to see for 10 years.

But us I understand in this specific case she played an important role in driving one of her employees to suicide, and her fraud concerning her tech is not just financial, it was giving people false information about their health, including cancer - which is close to violence to me.

In fact my sympathy with this case is not that it is too harsh for a small crime (fraud), it is that the crime is so huge that she must have been psychopath and might deserve mental treatment. Genuinely how can someone live with giving hundred of thousands of people false health information based on a test they know is garbage?

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

#67

Post by TeMPOraL »

rapsey wrote: post #27
telltruth wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You are throwing the baby out with the bathwater there.

Still better than bringing a baby into this world as s defense tactic in court.

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

#68

Post by tinycombinator »

drstewart wrote: post #51
mvdtnz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do not feel bad for her. Do not even give her a single thought.

It's pretty important to dehumanize and de-empathize with people who offend or break the law. A good justice system and society is built in doling out punishments without reflection or understanding.

I see the valid point you make about how civilization should strive to be above cruel, black/white judgement and ideally encourage empathy towards others in order to be considered just. But I also can't argue against an average citizen not having enough empathy/attention to give (from the limited pool we all have) to one of the biggest and most infamous con artists of our time. It's not like she's in there for just doing drugs.

Law should not be one's entire moral compass, but the things she did are undeniably extreme.

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

#69

Post by klyrs »

archibaldJ wrote: post #65
klyrs wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have the capacity to feel really bad for her kids. I couldn't care less about the rich investors money she squandered, but as a mother I'm spitting furious that she would bring two children into this world, knowing that she was guilty for the fraud that she stood accused of. She's begged the courts for leniency on behalf of her children, and I really want to believe that she didn't have children for that sole purpo…

or perhaps not every human decision /behavior should be interpreted with too much intentions. Most likely she actually believed in how it could have worked out.

There is a difference between believing she operates under such cold calculus, and not believing she doesn't. I could be convinced one way, but not the other.

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

#70

Post by WalterBright »

klyrs wrote: post #44
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.

I have the capacity to feel really bad for her kids. I couldn't care less about the rich investors money she squandered, but as a mother I'm spitting furious that she would bring two children into this world, knowing that she was guilty for the fraud that she stood accused of. She's begged the courts for leniency on behalf of her children, and I really want to believe that she didn't have children for that sole purpo…

One the other hand, if she waited until after prison to have children, she might have been to old to have them.
Post reply on HN