CA - Elizabeth Holmes (Theranos) Wire Fraud

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seattle1 said:
The real truth is that Gardner's a 70-year old professional scholar whose only recognition (still) is talking down EH. I also don't respect her for consistently failing to disclose that her husband served on the prestigious Theranos Advisory Board from which they handsomely profited.
Click to expand...

Snipped for focus
Dr. Gardener mentions clearly and readily in the "Danny in the Valley" (Times of London) blog I cite upthread that her husband was on the board in the very early days of Theranos.

Dr. Gardner worked for years in the corporate world, in a startup that was sold to J&J. Viz "Danny in the Valley" podcast. She has extensive links to industry as a result.

I'm not sure why Dr. Gardner would want to be on the advisory board for someone she thought was naìve, uninterested in advice, and a fraud. Later Dr. Gardner protested vigorously when EH was nominated to the Harvard Medical School Board of Fellows. So, yeah, I don't see a problem in her not being on any Theranos boards. I mean, why should she be? And she was right, after all.

I'm not sure what would be wrong with being 70 and using your trained and practiced talents in a specialty field? Could you elaborate your idea on that?

Would you mind providing a source for the comment that it was a prestigious board and the amount of the profit? Do you have a source for how Gardner benefited financially? It doesn't appear that she would lack for money in her own right owing to her corporate roles, and these days, many spouses keep their finances separate.

[Viz. Audio interview with Dr. Phyllis Gardner of Stanford University by Danny Fortson, Silicon Valley tech correspondent for The London Times, broadcasting as “Danny in the Valley”. Link: Dr. Phyllis Gardner, Stanford Professor and Theranos Critic: “I’ll only really feel good if she’s convicted”]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would have LOVED to have this professor as a Ph.D. candidate! She's clearly rigorous and demanding, but open to new ideas (she's worked with a lot of Ph.D. candidates as well as students with startup ideas). IMO if she's on your side, I can see that you would benefit dramatically. She might put you through the mill, but magnify your talents.
I want to sign up for her freshman seminar!
 
Last edited:
LinasK said:
Huh??? And I've had some basic chemistry. What the heck does that even mean?
Click to expand...
I had high school chemistry at a ghetto high school, and even I know that doesn't make sense.

The whole "drop of blood" thing never made sense to me, either. It would have to be diluted too much to run that many tests.
 
I'm still happy that these people finally feel free enough to speak out about the charlatan Holmes. I really don't care if it's seen as sour grapes. Holmes is/was a danger to society with her faulty tests. People could've died from her misinformation. Plus there's the whole financial fraud crimes aspect as well.
 
RickshawFan said:
I would have LOVED to have this professor as a Ph.D. candidate! She's clearly rigorous and demanding, but open to new ideas (she's worked with a lot of Ph.D. candidates as well as students with startup ideas). She pulls no punches. But I also appreciate that she calls a spade a spade and is very down to earth. I want to sign up for her freshman seminar!
Click to expand...
Me too!
 
RickshawFan said:
I had high school chemistry at a ghetto high school, and even I know that doesn't make sense.

The whole "drop of blood" thing never made sense to me, either. It would have to be diluted too much to run that many tests.
Click to expand...
Since one drop clearly wasn't enough to run multiple tests- think how they do DNA samples and they have to have an adequate amount- she did have them dilute the samples. It was all a sham what happened behind the closed lab doors.
 
RickshawFan said:
This seems so bizarre to me. Seriously, who's going to believe her when she's so entitled? This was her "baby" and her hands were all over every mess she made, too. It will be really interesting what of her self-entitled details can make their way into the trial.
Does anyone know if Bulwani can get called as a witness?
Click to expand...
Seems like the prosecution could if they cut a deal with him. It'd be in his best interests, since she seems intent on throwing him under the bus.
 
Silicon Valley braces for the next ‘Theranos’ scandal | Business | The Sunday Times

8/29/2021

There is a sense in Silicon Valley that Elizabeth Holmes, the executive accused of orchestrating a multibillion-dollar fraud at defunct blood-testing upstart Theranos, stands alone. That the brazenness and complexity of her alleged crime will never be repeated.

But imitation is the sincerest form of flattery — and the fraud said to have been perpetrated by Holmes, who denies the charges, and whose long-awaited trial begins this week, has no shortage of imitators. The latest, according to charges brought last week, is Manish Lachwani, 45, founder of an app-testing start-up called HeadSpin.
 
RickshawFan said:
I agree with all of that. EH is being afforded the same consideration as other working mothers. But it’s relevant here IMO that she didn’t get any special consideration. The judge is hewing to the mandatory.
I think it’s likely that the baby thing was a manipulative ploy, and the judge made the manipulation a non-issue. The jury will never see EH with a baby or even a residual bump because of the timing the judge laid down. No playing the mommy card.
From what I’ve seen of EH, she expects special treatment. Ghislaine Maxwell is butting up against a similar no-nonsense approach (she refuses to flush or clean her jail toilet). This is going to be a fun fall. Two special snowflakes whose sense of entitlement will be challenged big time. Both have “take no prisoners” female judges.
Click to expand...
This makes me really happy because this woman definitely seems to work the aspect of her female charisma, much like Jodi Arias and Casey Anthony did. They think that they can snow men with their feminine wiles and pull the rug out from under them. That doesn't work on other women. Apparently she's also a dyed blonde, and deepens her voice unnaturally.
 
RickshawFan said:
This seems so bizarre to me. Seriously, who's going to believe her when she's so entitled? This was her "baby" and her hands were all over every mess she made, too. It will be really interesting what of her self-entitled details can make their way into the trial.
Does anyone know if Bulwani can get called as a witness?
Click to expand...

She would have to have evidence of abuse. Without having an outside source where she confided her fears, digital history, etc it will be difficult to prove abuse.
 
Auntie Cipation said:
According to multiple articles, jury selection starts tomorrow, Monday 8/30.

So 5 days of jury selection, the trial "starts" on Tuesday 9/7 but opening statements not until Weds 9/8 -- I too wonder what happens on 9/7. Maybe initial jury instructions?
Click to expand...

No - it starts tomorrow... and on 9/1

Tuesday, Aug 31 2021
09:00AM
5:18-cr-00258-EJD-1 - USA v. Elizabeth A. Holmes
AUSA: Jeffrey Schenk / DEF: Kevin Downey
Jury Selection

link: CALENDAR
 
So this trial is expected to run three days a week "for several months".

I wonder how many alternate jurors they will need to seat in order to still have 12 left months from now?

Are they going to sequester the jury for covid prevention reasons?

So many questions!

Guess we'll learn as time goes by.

MOO
 
Tuesday, August 31st:
*Trial begins with Jury Selection (@ 9am PT) - CA – for *Elizabeth A. Holmes (34/now 37) (CEO of Theranos) charged (March, 2018) & indicted (6/14/18) & arraigned (6/15/18) with 9 counts of wire fraud & 2 counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and charged & indicted (4/11/20) with fraud relating to a patient's blood test. Another count of wire fraud was added in 2020, bringing the total number of felony charges to 12. Plead not guilty. No bond. Faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison & up to $2.75 million in fines, plus restitution, & $250K for each individual count of wire fraud & conspiracy.
Defrauding investors out of $700 million in funding for their blood-testing startup Theranos.
Trial set to begin on 8/31/21 with jury selection. The Court trial days will be Tuesday, Wednesday & Friday, possibly other half days. The Court may modify the trial time & set either 8:30am-2pm or 9am-2pm & possibly 30-minute breaks in between. Judge Edward J. Davila presiding. Jury selection on 8/31 & 9/1, trial dates 9/8, 9/10, 9/14, 9/15, 9/17, 9/21, 9/22, 9/24, 9/28, 9/29, 10/1, 10/5, 10/6, 10/8 so far.
Indictment & court info from 4/11/20 thru 8/16/21 reference post #297 here:
CA - Elizabeth Holmes (Theranos) Wire Fraud
8/20/21 Update: Motions hearing on 8/20/21. Regarding motion for miscellaneous relief, motion to exclude & motion to strike discussed. Next intervenors motion hearing on 8/26/21.
8/26/21 Update: Next jury selection begins on 8/31/21. Judge Edward Davila said he plans to bring in 50 potential jurors at a time & conduct voir dire in three separate sessions.
*Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani (53/now 56) (CFO & President of Theranos) – Intervenors motion hearing on 8/26/21 & trial set to begin on 1/11/22 with jury selection & trial starts on 1/18/22.
 
Will Elizabeth Holmes Being Able to Convince Jurors Like Investors?

8/31/2021

[..]

Attorneys will also likely consider the fact that Balwani, the alleged abuser, is Pakistani. All jurors, all humans, have Implicit Bias against all types of people. (If you think you don’t, you are likely wrong: try taking Harvard’s Implicit Association Test.). There are bound to be some potential jurors with an implicit bias against Middle Eastern men. That is a perspective that Holmes’ attorneys will also want to consider.

It’s worth noting that this jury will likely be very different from Holmes’ “jury” of investors. When you look at those who invested the most into Theranos, they are almost all white, wealthy men (with Betsy DeVos as an exception) or families. They were all rich, educated and privileged. This jury is much more likely to look, sound and act like a cross section of America. Holmes’ job will be to find a way to advocate to them just as effectively as she advocated to her investors.

I often say, “Facts tell. Stories sell. Advocates win.” In this case, both sides have their facts, the evidence they’ll use to make their case. They both have the stories they will tell about what happened here, and why. But ultimately it will be the better advocates that win. Every lawyer and every witness will have to use the tools of an advocate to change the jurors’ choices.

[..]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 129 more.
Total: 1,707 (members: 130, guests: 1,577)

Online statistics

Members online
130
Guests online
1,577
Total visitors
1,707
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,165
Messages
18,199,850
Members
233,765
Latest member
Lineman21
Back
Top