Elizabeth Holmes found guilty • Hacker News Board

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#281

Post by s1artibartfast » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 1:56 AM UTC

niyazpk wrote: post #272

beebmam wrote: post #227

Sending fraudulent people to jail for a long, long time is fundamental to running a healthy society. One of the reasons the US is a decent place to live compared to other countries is because we actually prosecute frauds and criminals here. Let's start seeing some other countries around the world start doing this, like India, Russia, and China. My 80 year old mother was recently tricked into wiring money by Indian sc…

> Sending fraudulent people to jail for a long, long time is fundamental to running a healthy society Really?! Interesting... I agree, a functioning society needs good law and order, and some way to prosecute and bring criminals to justice. But I am personally not convinced that sending someone "to jail for a long, long time" is the solution. How is that productive? I think we need to come up with better ways to serv…

It is the worst solution, aside from all of the others.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#282

Post by throwawaylinux » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 1:57 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #255

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

Yeah, that's a surprising thing for him to say, since he's generally one of the loudest voices against this "add up the sentences" stuff. The grouping rules are in the sentencing guidelines too! Go look!

Why does that make it surprising?

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#283

Post by jen20 » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 1:57 AM UTC

jonwachob91 wrote: post #40

It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. Investors know that every dollar they put into a company could disappear, it's why startups get capital from investors and not bank loans. But a patient does not expect for their blood test results to be completely wrong. Her tests weren't giving false-negatives or false-positives, the…

I've been reading Dorothy Atkins' live tweet coverage of the trial since day 1, and it gives a blow by blow account of it. It starts at [1], and runs all the way up until the verdict. Strongly recommended.

[1]: https://twitter.com/doratki/status/1435590320897478657

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#284

Post by neom » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 1:57 AM UTC

dopamean wrote: post #202

neom wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I followed the case very closely, read the transcripts I could find daily etc. What Elizabeth did wasn't far from what many many many founders do. This was held to a legal standard, sure, but let's be real here... since when was the legal standard the SV standard? Is SV really the bastion of morality and legal ethics? Is that the new norm, good behaviour? Notably some investors refused to participate and iirc Draper…

> What Elizabeth did wasn't far from what many many many founders do I'm not sure this is true. She told a lot of egregious lies to investors while trying to get money from them. She repeated those lies in the press and to anyone who questioned it. And I don't mean a lie like lying that your product is more effective than it is. I mean she told prospective investors about huge contracts with the defense department th…

That's not what she said at all. At least not from the near daily coverage and transcripts I watched[1][2][3][4]

She said it was being trialed by the military, in reality what had happened was Mattis said he would be able to introduce the technology to the military. This type of "abstraction" is in very many pitches I've read over the years.

[1]https://www.youtube.com/c/LawyerYouKnow [2]https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOShJ_GPEegXscrlKWfpwCA [3]https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiWXvA_5bzvOFdbS353Ll-Q [4]https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwCqasesYi60fSrOjlUSNzg

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#285

Post by bluishgreen » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 1:57 AM UTC

fnord77 wrote: post #122

why are the charges "wire fraud" and not just "defrauding investors" ? is there some technicality at play here?

Yes, In order to invoke federal jurisdiction the SEC uses the fact that they communicated beyond state lines over the wire. This is why all the charges are called wire fraud. Relevant: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#286

Post by seibelj » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 1:58 AM UTC

niyazpk wrote: post #272

beebmam wrote: post #227

Sending fraudulent people to jail for a long, long time is fundamental to running a healthy society. One of the reasons the US is a decent place to live compared to other countries is because we actually prosecute frauds and criminals here. Let's start seeing some other countries around the world start doing this, like India, Russia, and China. My 80 year old mother was recently tricked into wiring money by Indian sc…

> Sending fraudulent people to jail for a long, long time is fundamental to running a healthy society Really?! Interesting... I agree, a functioning society needs good law and order, and some way to prosecute and bring criminals to justice. But I am personally not convinced that sending someone "to jail for a long, long time" is the solution. How is that productive? I think we need to come up with better ways to serv…

The length can be debated, but jail wastes the most priceless resource you have - time. That’s why it’s a punishment.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#287

Post by 300bps » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 2:00 AM UTC

a-dub wrote: post #266

jonwachob91 wrote: post #40

It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. Investors know that every dollar they put into a company could disappear, it's why startups get capital from investors and not bank loans. But a patient does not expect for their blood test results to be completely wrong. Her tests weren't giving false-negatives or false-positives, the…

> It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. my thoughts exactly. i'm woefully underread on the whole situation but something is weird and different about it. one thing that does jump to mind is that the investor list and board composition isn't what i'm used to seeing for stem ventures. i can imagine that perhaps they're less…

To me it seems like a simple matter of don't mess with people that have money.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#288

Post by syki » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 2:00 AM UTC

nemo44x wrote: post #177

paxys wrote: post #140

Guilty of taking a billion+ dollars from rich and influential people who couldn't bother to do the bare minimum due diligence into their investments due to greed and FOMO. Not guilty of endangering thousands of lives by running fraudulent and inaccurate tests under sub-par lab conditions. Our justice system is such a farce.

Our justice system works well. You are confusing your own emotional feelings for what you would have liked to see with the reality of what was able to be proven without reasonable doubt. The type of populist mob justice you allude* to is not just at all. *(Fixed grammar error specified below)

Your comments in regard to this case are right but our justice system does not work well. People who can afford lawyers do much better than those who can’t.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#289

Post by tptacek » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 2:00 AM UTC

throwawaylinux wrote: post #282

tptacek wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's a surprising thing for him to say, since he's generally one of the loudest voices against this "add up the sentences" stuff. The grouping rules are in the sentencing guidelines too! Go look!

Why does that make it surprising?

For one thing, because he's the author of this pretty famous post:

https://www.popehat.com/2013/02/05/crime-whale-sushi-sentenc...

For another, because the guidelines are pretty specific in this case --- that 2B1.1 crimes are charged according to --- well, here's the wording from the guidelines: "the applicable base offense level is determined by the count of conviction that provides the highest statutory maximum term of imprisonment.". So "3x20" seems off the table.

Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty

#290

Post by tptacek » Tue, Jan 04, 2022, 2:00 AM UTC

avirut wrote: post #127

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…

Does multiple counts served concurrently mean that the effective sentence is just the longest individual sentence? Also: I'm seeing from various websites that the maximum time-left-to-serve for minimum security (federal prison camp) is 10 years, but nothing definitive - [1] is the most in-depth but only specifies this requirement for male prisoners, whereas other requirements are clearly distinguished between male an…

Yes, the guidelines are kind of explicit about this for basic economic crimes. Ken White's the lawyer, though, not me!

They're actually even more specific for fraud cases, beyond the general 2B1.1 basic economic crime rule of sentencing according to the most severe count; for fraud, you apparently sum up all the losses from all the counts, which has the net effect of bumping Holmes up 2 additional levels.